Should there be an IS/IT Union?

[Cybermastif]

Ok ladies and Gents, a few years ago I was involved in a discussion in my college ACM chapter on whether there should be a Union for IS/IT professionals. At the time myself and one other person were the only ones who had any practical experience in the field. (We were both doing the school and work thing...) Even so, we never really came to a decision that had a clear majority. Generally speaking those, who never worked in the field were against it, those who had at least pulled an interenship or two were generally for it.

So what is you opinion, and why?



Here is my 2¢

I believe that we should have a Union for IT/IS professionals. The why is simple. I am rather tired of working my a$$ off, working every holiday, being on call all the time, getting less than what a professional with my numbers of skills in other fields would get, and simply being forgotten about. We work on a shoestring budget decided upon by idiots higher up who have no real idea of what resources it takes to effectivelly run an enterprise environment 7/24/365! I am tired of being -itched at for systems failures and then looked over when things are going well. We are forgotten about and considered an unwanted expense of doing business. The world today would not be as it is w/o computers and those that maintain/control/design them. It is we who provide and manage the software that controls production, yet we are forgotten and left thankless. That is bunk. And that is why I want to see us have a Union sometime in the near future.

 

[amnesiac]

I'll agree, because as with Union jobs, IT is a specialized trade requiring experience and real working knowledge, and too often I see IT people getting abused.

 

[axelfox]

i hope you don't use that as the proposal

 

[stev0]

farmers have unions.. why cant nerds?

 

[mithrandir2001]

You don't even need a union with all of its BS, political undertones and costs. All you need to do is gather up the troops at your office and threaten to stage a walk-out or something. If most IT workers at my company just didn't show up to work one day, the company would be in big trouble. You'd get their attention pretty quick.

 

[gopunk]

Originally posted by: mithrandir2001
You don't even need a union with all of its BS, political undertones and costs. All you need to do is gather up the troops at your office and threaten to stage a walk-out or something. If most IT workers at my company just didn't show up to work one day, the company would be in big trouble. You'd get their attention pretty quick.

mm... i thought that's what a union is...

 

[Jzero]

I vote no. I've worked in the IT field ranging from intern to my current managerial position over the past 4 years. I'm surrounded by slackers who constantly bitch about being over-worked and underpaid. As much as I'd like to get paid more, I think I do pretty well for the amount of work and grief I take. I feel that in the current circumstances, unionization would simply give the slackers a stronger sounding board to voice their opinions so that they can scam out even more pay for even less work while the good workers like my continue to pick up their slack. When these slackers finally get the can, I don't want them to have a union to back them up.

 

[mithrandir2001]

Originally posted by: gopunk

Originally posted by: mithrandir2001
You don't even need a union with all of its BS, political undertones and costs. All you need to do is gather up the troops at your office and threaten to stage a walk-out or something. If most IT workers at my company just didn't show up to work one day, the company would be in big trouble. You'd get their attention pretty quick.

mm... i thought that's what a union is...

A union yes. But that's not Union. Union means overhead and clowns halfway across the country telling you what to think, what to do, even how to vote. I'm simply talking about a temporary, loose-knit organization unaffliated with a labor Union.

 

[yakko]

No. If you don't like your job then get another one.

 

[NikPreviousAcct]

I'm against any kind of union if it's going to be like the current Union... Nothing like getting "benefits" that you have to pay for, paying huge union dues only to find out that the "retirement" that they give you comes out of the dues that you paid in to them - and not even the whole amount. WTF. You're better off going non-union.

nik

 

[T2T III]

I vote no. I've worked in the IT field ranging from intern to my current managerial position over the past 4 years. I'm surrounded by slackers who constantly bitch about being over-worked and underpaid. As much as I'd like to get paid more, I think I do pretty well for the amount of work and grief I take. I feel that in the current circumstances, unionization would simply give the slackers a stronger sounding board to voice their opinions so that they can scam out even more pay for even less work while the good workers like my continue to pick up their slack. When these slackers finally get the can, I don't want them to have a union to back them up.

Since you're in a management position, why not work on changing the attitude in your shop? You have the power to change the perception of the people who work for you. It's a two-way street. Maybe if the "slackers" get shown some respect, they'll start to change their attitudes about their work and start to be genuine contributors rather than "slackers."

I currently have a supervisor that's good at managing the B.S. in the group, but bad at managing and motivating people. People have no respect for this individual and it's very clear why they have no respect for him - because he doesn't have any respect for the people. Sometimes, you have to give in life to get something in return.

I've managed many individuals where I've been in team leader roles. I had so much respect for the individuals that worked for me, they were very productive individuals and were comfortable in their work environment. Sure, there were a few individuals from time-to-time that we had to let go, but on the whole, I was very happy with the performance of the individuals who worked for me. Oh, some of those individuals who were good contributors while working for me, were labeled "slackers" while under the supervision of another individual.

Labeling someone a "slacker" really isn't professional. If you're a true leader, you'll successfully achieve at motivating them and changing their attitudes towards their work. By calling them "slackers" - you're not any better than them when they're bitching and moaning about being overworked and underpaid.

And, I'm agains I.S./I.T. unions. Unions are not usually good things to be involved with. Unions don't do as much for individuals as people think. For example, everyone in a shop could get the same raise (e.g. - 4% or 5%) regardless of how hard or how little someone has worked. Instead, being in a non-union shop and being a good worker might get you an 8% or 9% raise while those who are not performing as well as you could get only a 2% raise.

 

[Ameesh]

i get treated very fairly at work, I am lucky enough to be able to choose where to work so if i was being treated unfairly i would just leave and go to another job. I don't think i'd ever join a union.

 

[reitz]

I believe that we should have a Union for IT/IS professionals. The why is simple. I am rather tired of working my a$$ off, working every holiday, being on call all the time, getting less than what a professional with my numbers of skills in other fields would get, and simply being forgotten about. We work on a shoestring budget decided upon by idiots higher up who have no real idea of what resources it takes to effectivelly run an enterprise environment 7/24/365! I am tired of being -itched at for systems failures and then looked over when things are going well. We are forgotten about and considered an unwanted expense of doing business. The world today would not be as it is w/o computers and those that maintain/control/design them. It is we who provide and manage the software that controls production, yet we are forgotten and left thankless. That is bunk. And that is why I want to see us have a Union sometime in the near future.

Yes, let's create an IS/IT union. After all, the lowest paid group of IT workers is only taking home a mean of $39,680 annually. How is someone supposed to afford a BMW and summer home on that kind of money?

Come on everybody, we need a union...and those fun union concepts that are missing from our offices. Like seniority; I don't want to have to gain any new skills, take any classes, or excel at my job to get promoted. I'd rather see promotions based on seniority. Screw merit-based raises, too! Who cares if I work harder; I'd rather the guys who've worked there longer make the real money.

I can't wait until we all get to use timecards and punch in and out (for breaks and lunches, too! Gotta make sure we're taking those breaks...) The new rules should be a blast: punch in seven minutes late, and we'll be docked pay; scheduled, timed breaks and lunches; contracts, collective bargaining units, union dues...damn, this sounds like a good idea!

The best part? We can greive every termination! Even that idiot who only creates more work for the rest of us! Let's take away management's discretion in hiring and firing, create a nice adversarial relationship, and ensure that even the least qualified among us has a job with an artificially inflated salary. We are highly-skilled IT professionals, damn it! We deserve it.

Let's unionize, and drive our wages sky-high. Let's make it even more expensive for the small businesses who already have trouble affording our services. Who needs them, anyway? Huge companies, contract negotiations, and walkouts are what we want. Let's drive up the cost of IT in America; IS/IT budgets are already the largest of the administrative departments in most companies, so no one should care if they get a little bigger.

We're already used to layoffs, in fact I think we could use a few more. We can count on it if we unionize, and we can also count on fewer backfills and new hires. Who is really that busy at work? I know I wouldn't mind taking on more duties.

Let's discourage hard work, and eliminate merit-based raises. Let's encourage mediocrity, reward longevity, and basically do everything we can to stamp out progress and innovation in one of our fastest-growing (and most important) industries. It's worth it, since we're highly-skilled IT professionals, and we want more money...along with more outsizing and job exports, of course. That's to be expected with a union, and a union is what we need.

IS/IT workers unite! We must form our own union! It'll be great; we all have so much to look forward to. With just a little effort we can destroy the IT field; just like the steel industry, the textile industry, or American heavy manufacturing in the past. What are we waiting for? Let's unionize!

 

[Cybermastif]

Originally posted by: reitz

I believe that we should have a Union for IT/IS professionals. The why is simple. I am rather tired of working my a$$ off, working every holiday, being on call all the time, getting less than what a professional with my numbers of skills in other fields would get, and simply being forgotten about. We work on a shoestring budget decided upon by idiots higher up who have no real idea of what resources it takes to effectivelly run an enterprise environment 7/24/365! I am tired of being -itched at for systems failures and then looked over when things are going well. We are forgotten about and considered an unwanted expense of doing business. The world today would not be as it is w/o computers and those that maintain/control/design them. It is we who provide and manage the software that controls production, yet we are forgotten and left thankless. That is bunk. And that is why I want to see us have a Union sometime in the near future.

Yes, let's create an IS/IT union. After all, the lowest paid group of IT workers is only taking home a mean of $39,680 annually. How is someone supposed to afford a BMW and summer home on that kind of money?

Come on everybody, we need a union...and those fun union concepts that are missing from our offices. Like seniority; I don't want to have to gain any new skills, take any classes, or excel at my job to get promoted. I'd rather see promotions based on seniority. Screw merit-based raises, too! Who cares if I work harder; I'd rather the guys who've worked there longer make the real money.

I can't wait until we all get to use timecards and punch in and out (for breaks and lunches, too! Gotta make sure we're taking those breaks...) The new rules should be a blast: punch in seven minutes late, and we'll be docked pay; scheduled, timed breaks and lunches; contracts, collective bargaining units, union dues...damn, this sounds like a good idea!

The best part? We can greive every termination! Even that idiot who only creates more work for the rest of us! Let's take away management's discretion in hiring and firing, create a nice adversarial relationship, and ensure that even the least qualified among us has a job with an artificially inflated salary. We are highly-skilled IT professionals, damn it! We deserve it.

Let's unionize, and drive our wages sky-high. Let's make it even more expensive for the small businesses who already have trouble affording our services. Who needs them, anyway? Huge companies, contract negotiations, and walkouts are what we want. Let's drive up the cost of IT in America; IS/IT budgets are already the largest of the administrative departments in most companies, so no one should care if they get a little bigger.

We're already used to layoffs, in fact I think we could use a few more. We can count on it if we unionize, and we can also count on fewer backfills and new hires. Who is really that busy at work? I know I wouldn't mind taking on more duties.

Let's discourage hard work, and eliminate merit-based raises. Let's encourage mediocrity, reward longevity, and basically do everything we can to stamp out progress and innovation in one of our fastest-growing (and most important) industries. It's worth it, since we're highly-skilled IT professionals, and we want more money...along with more outsizing and job exports, of course. That's to be expected with a union, and a union is what we need.

IS/IT workers unite! We must form our own union! It'll be great; we all have so much to look forward to. With just a little effort we can destroy the IT field; just like the steel industry, the textile industry, or American heavy manufacturing in the past. What are we waiting for? Let's unionize!

Nice dribbling scarism... Look I am not saying that if there was a union that it would act in the same manner or even be in the same form as the stereo typical trade union. There are many unions out there that are loosely based, and more often then not act as a tool to protect the rights of thier members. I understand that most people see unions as a means to protect the lazy yet increase wages. But you know what I would rather see, is some time off. I am working at a shop where everyone here puts in overtime, every week. At one point most of us were working 60-80hrs every week. This was curtailed as the bean counters said we were way over budget. (We at least do get over time pay...) but we can't get all the projects that are piled upon us, completed w/o working those hours, so by not completing those projects, we take bs for it. So it is a lose/lose situtation. This is where a union would be helpful.

You mentioned benefits, well let me tell you, benefits are nice, for a long time I didn't have benefits as the company I work for didn't provide them. I got them through joining a group of others in the same situtation, at least until my company did begin to offer them. But once again it was a situtation where it would have been nice to be in a union. When people pool thier resources, everyone in the group benefits.

You also mentioned that people should get raises based upon thier abilities and work performance. Sorry to tell you, but I am in a place where they don't believe that. They give everyone a raise at the same percentage, no matter the quality of work. Granted if you are not performing, they discuss the situtation with you, and if you don't improve, you are outta here. Suprisingly we have only had one person in the last three years head out the door that way. So if that is the way a union does it, so what, for me it makes no differance.

Finally you brought up about people who have senoritiy getting promoted over those who have skills. Personally I have two opinions on this. 1. I would rather those who have technical skills not be promoted to management. Let them do what they do best, and more then likely it is not manage people. 2ndly, Unions don't always promote based upon senority, it all depends upon what is in the contract. A contact can say what ever the union feels is in thier best interest. We have unions we have to deal with at the various factories, and thier specifics are different from factory to factory, but they are still part of the same union.

The last thing is this, if we were to have a union, I would expect it not to deal with our retirements, nor would I want to have the union determine promotions. What I want the union for is to keep the companies we work for honest. I want them to treat us fairly. If I am working 80hrs a week I would want them to consider that when they call me in the middle of the night. Better yet, give me vacation time for my over time (assuming that they balance the federal requirement for over time wages... ie. 1.5hrs for every hour worked.. also known as time and a half...) I would gladly work 80hr weeks for 2 months then take 2 months of paid vacation. A union would also be very advantagous to those who are working for small business that have no way of affording health benefits, assuming that joining the unions health ins program is optional. And for retirements, I would not expect to get retirement benefits from a union, many companies already offer a 401k plan, no need to provide it. And yes i know there are those who work for places that simply don't have retirement, they should be smart enough to be investing for thier retirement on thier own.



BTW Yakko, if I disliked my job enough to leave, I'd simply go down to florida and hang out with you. We could be best buddies! LOL!

 

[AnyMal]

I would rather those who have technical skills not be promoted to management. Let them do what they do best, and more then likely it is not manage people

This is one of the most assinine things I've heard. In my years in IT I have seen plenty of management who have no IT background whatsoever; perhaps, they had decent leadership skills but it's not enough to lead a group of highly technical people. A true leader is the one that can set an example, that can train and motivate others. Now how in the world can someone who knows jack about computers can lead, train, and motivate? Here's an example:
Manager: Hey man! What's going on?
Me: Nothing much.. What's up?
Manager: I have a question for you. My wife just brought a computer home from work and we want to upgrade it to Windows 2000 Pro.
Me: OK
Manager: Well, I went to CompUSA bought the upgrade disk, got home, put it in a CD drive but get all kinds of errors and nothing happens.
Me: OK. What kind of PC is it?
Manager: I dunno, but it's kind of flashy and has a see-thru case.
Me: (getting suspicious) Apple?
Manager: (light bulb went of in his head) yea, that's it! Do you think it's too old or something?
Me: ummmm.. you can't install Windows 2000 on Apple.
Manager: why not? a kid at CompUSA told me that as long as I run OS released after Windows 95 I can upgrade.
Me: Don't we have an opening on a helpdesk? Hire him. (I look at the pager pretending to have an important page) Sorry man, gotta make a phone call.

That's non-technical management for you. Just my $.02 Almost forgot, screw unions!

 

[Cybermastif]

AnyMal I can understand where you are going, and respect your opinion, using the example you gave though, a person who is that stupid, should not be managing anyone, whether they be technical or not.

A good manager does not need to be extremely technical. They have to have execellent management skills. They need to also learn what they need to know to be able to deal with technical people. I know a couple CIO's, of fortune 500 companies and I can tell you, even though they are very, very good at what they do, they don't know the acute technical details of all that goes on. They don't need to know. They need to know that the people under them understand what they are doing, and can do the job, whithout them stairing over thier shoulders. And it goes down the line from there. If you need someone that is extremely technical managing, then what you are saying is that you can not work effectivelly w/o supervision. That you WANT micro-management.

A good manager, will give you a task to accomplish (whether it be a project, or a simple one off task) and let you be to accomplish it. As far as training goes, that should be a two way street. You should be working with you boss telling him/her what training you are going to need, and then they need to budget it. If they are good they will also have a career path for you drawn out with your help and the help of human resources.

I have seen good managers and bad managers. Best examples of both was while I was in the Air Force. I had one commanding officier who was horrible. Really nice person, had an exellent technical background, infact she had a cs degree, but she could not manage out flight for snott. next CO I had had a degree in education, he was awsome. He ran a tight ship, everything ran smoothly, but the man only had the basic skills when it came to computers. He didn't need to have more then that, he was managing. I have seen the same thing time and time agin out in the real world.

Lastly on that example you gave, the manager shows a severe lack of professionalism, at any level, and in any field. You never bring in your home to work, and you absolutely never push your family into a position within the same company. It lacks professionalism, not to mention it is simply rude.

 

[hans007]

well IT is a specialized job, but i don tthink they can form a union. its not like a steel mill where you never have to learn anything again. besides unions seem to only be formed for labor that is easy to learn . i suppose IT isnt that hard to learn, you could probably get all the creds and read a bunch of books and be an IT guy in a year.

unions are usually formed by groups who have no leverage. I.E. one steel mill worker quitting doesnt do anything, but the whole place striking does. IT guys tend to be a lot more important, and there arent that many of them, so they have enough leverage as it is. Its not like IT guys are not well paid anyways (most i'd say make a lot, lots make more than programmers etc), especially considering the level of education of some IT guys (i.e. i went to jr college, took a bunch of worthless MCSE, CCNA, A+ classes.. etc)



I'm completely against the idea of unions though, pure economics should rule .

 

[Double Trouble]

As usual, Reitz hit the nail on the head......

People in management positions must have strong management, communications and organization skills. They do not need to have a detailed understanding of all the technical stuff -- just enough background knowledge to be able to understand the fundamental issues involved as they pertain to management decisions.

Some people with technical skills have no management skils, while others do. Generally though, the education of highly skilled IT people does not include a lot of management training (unlike for example Finance or Accounting etc, where management training is a large part of the education), which leaves a lot of tech folks ill prepared to step into a management role when their number is called......

I've been lucky enough to work for good all-around managers, which is what matters most, regardless of whether they have any technical knowledge or not.

 

[Rallispec]

i cnat believe thier isnt one already

 

[Jzero]

Since you're in a management position, why not work on changing the attitude in your shop? You have the power to change the perception of the people who work for you. It's a two-way street. Maybe if the "slackers" get shown some respect, they'll start to change their attitudes about their work and start to be genuine contributors rather than "slackers."

You're preaching to the choir. The truth is, I've got one person under me, and as far as I know, he's pretty happy and motivated. I work in a department that's divided into 4 subgroups, and I'm only in charge of one of those. We just recently hired a very solid manager for the networking subgroup, so those guys are also doing pretty well, and as an added bonus, this particular guy has been giving me a lot of under-the-table training since I'm pretty green when it comes to managing.
Unfortunately, the other two subgroups are managed by guys who pretty much assumed their roles simply because they were here. They are the primary demotivating force in our office...they're even good at demotivating me.
Truth is, the A-1 slacker in this group used to be the hardest worker I've ever seen, and one of these managers actually criticized him for working so hard.
So now he doesn't work at all.
Nice move, dippy.

I currently have a supervisor that's good at managing the B.S. in the group, but bad at managing and motivating people. People have no respect for this individual and it's very clear why they have no respect for him - because he doesn't have any respect for the people. Sometimes, you have to give in life to get something in return.

Oh, some of those individuals who were good contributors while working for me, were labeled "slackers" while under the supervision of another individual.

Labeling someone a "slacker" really isn't professional. If you're a true leader, you'll successfully achieve at motivating them and changing their attitudes towards their work. By calling them "slackers" - you're not any better than them when they're bitching and moaning about being overworked and underpaid.

I agree with this notion, but if you knew the people I was talking about, you'd realize what the deal is. Someone HAS to go. I'd prefer to can the manager because I agree with your notion that poor management is the reason these people are slackers.

 

[Cybermastif]

Wow, any other thoughts? Opinions?

Ulfwald, I thought I saw you in on a discussion on a simular subject once... you going to make you opinion known?