Just look at their employee reviews. The management there seems toxic.
I implore you to also think twice about the way in which you are demonizing unions. Sure, some unions aren’t the best, but what you’re saying is 100% discounting the benefits that a union can bring to employees. Union dues can more than pay for themselves in wage negotiation. They can restrict overwork, unpaid overtime (see the special salaried overtime exemptions that IT employees and teachers get enshrined into US law), and unsafe working conditions.
Sure, unions have bureaucracy, but they have bureaucracy that is incentivized to increase outcomes for the employee and not the employer. You are directly paying the union to represent and fight for you.
The “go work somewhere else” solution isn’t an equitable or realistic solution for many employees. That often equates to “I can go work somewhere else that’s just as shitty.”
Sure, life is nice for many tech employees right now, but what happens when the supply/demand situation inverts?
Tech employees often also have a very bad habit of pretending that more poorly compensated areas of their own company are enjoying the success in the same way. Ask someone in support or a junior graphic designer about what they think about the prospects of “working somewhere else.”
> The “go work somewhere else” solution isn’t an equitable or realistic solution for many employees. That often equates to “I can go work somewhere else that’s just as shitty.”
Bingo. I've worked at enough places to know that the greener grass myth is indeed a myth in the industry. That doesn't mean you can't get a better job, but there's always a very real risk that things will be worse at your new job.
This, plus in the USA you can't quit your current job without another one lined up, because your access to healthcare is dependent on employer-sponsored health insurance. Especially if you already made enough money for the year that you don't qualify for a program like Medicaid or state-sponsored subsidies.
> Sure, unions have bureaucracy, but they have bureaucracy that is incentivized to increase outcomes for the employee and not the employer. You are directly paying the union to represent and fight for you.
No, they have bureaucracy that is incentivized to increase the influence and power of the union leadership. You are directly paying the union to represent the union's interest, which may or may not align with your own.
E.g. a motivated, capable teacher has a portion of their salary deducted and spent on defending seniority based pay even if said teacher is in favor of performance based pay. The union directly acts against the desired of the employee.
Graphic designers work at most tech companies I've worked at, and I've never worked at a game studio. They definitely can be classified quite reasonably as tech employees.
Also, here in Montreal, most people's list of well-known local tech employers would absolutely include at least one or two of the many game studios here.
What percentage of employees at Google/Apple/Microsoft do you think are "graphic designers", and what percentage are "software developers"?
Your argument to create a union is that the 1% of employees need protection. Honestly I agree video game industries could use a union. But the presence of a graphics designer at Google does not mean every employee needs to unionize.
Google has more software developers, no doubt, but still far more graphic designers than you seem to expect.
No, every employee at Google does not need to unionize. CEO Sundar Pichai certainly doesn't. But lots of Googlers have long wanted a union for good reason, including software developers. I would have happily voted yes in a union election when I was there, despite being a software developer myself.
I know of plenty of examples of misbehaviour and other harmful actions by Google toward software development employees, a number of which have been publicly reported. And the situation seems to have gotten worse since I left.
To be clear, Google is far from unique in this regard, and it's still probably a better employer than many of its peer companies. That just underscores how severe and widespread the problem is.
> Union dues can more than pay for themselves in wage negotiation.
Those negotiations can also drag down your salary potential as well. You get paid what everyone else gets paid. If you warm the chair longer, you get paid more, regardless of any innovation or extra value you bring to the business.
You have incentivized mediocrity because what’s the point of doing anything beyond the minimum requirements? It isn’t like you’re going to get a raise for being especially clever.
I implore you to also think twice about the way in which you are demonizing unions. Sure, some unions aren’t the best, but what you’re saying is 100% discounting the benefits that a union can bring to employees. Union dues can more than pay for themselves in wage negotiation. They can restrict overwork, unpaid overtime (see the special salaried overtime exemptions that IT employees and teachers get enshrined into US law), and unsafe working conditions.
Sure, unions have bureaucracy, but they have bureaucracy that is incentivized to increase outcomes for the employee and not the employer. You are directly paying the union to represent and fight for you.
The “go work somewhere else” solution isn’t an equitable or realistic solution for many employees. That often equates to “I can go work somewhere else that’s just as shitty.”
Sure, life is nice for many tech employees right now, but what happens when the supply/demand situation inverts?
Tech employees often also have a very bad habit of pretending that more poorly compensated areas of their own company are enjoying the success in the same way. Ask someone in support or a junior graphic designer about what they think about the prospects of “working somewhere else.”