On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 6:13 AM,
<orsan@tie-netherlands.nl> wrote:
Your thought Richard evokes some others in my mind. Like orgainising facebook users and programmers at the same time, as well as youtube, twitter, google workers and users.
Since users are peer producers, they are immaterial free labour for these compaines. In principle can claim the product of their labour back, ownership of facebook, youtube, google and twitter.
Does anyone know if there is already a union in these companies?
and some people would join in for such an experiment?
Quoting Richard Schulte <
richard@flywheelcollective.com>:
Patrick,
As a member of a unionized worker co-op who deals exclusively with
software in the free & open source realm, I have not encountered many
issues with the impact of unionization on projects we are involved in.
If anything, unionization in the open source realm could be helpful.
Say, if the workers of Sun Microsystems were unionized, could they not
have resisted the buy-out by Oracle through a strike?
You make a good point though - that developers in the greater
community could act as 'scabs' in these situations. The thing is - as
long as they aren't being paid by the company that the workers are
striking against, then there is no issue, and they are not scabs. If
anything, they could be seen as acting in solidarity with the striking
programmers by ensuring that their software is still stable once they
get back on the clock. Or they could assist them by forking the
project and continuing development outside of the control of the
company (like the document foundation did). The free and open source
community is built around mutual aid, trust and solidarity (for the
most part).
The reason I make such a big point of union organization in the open
source software and hardware communities is that when starting new
ventures that are worker-owned, that these folks can build economies of
scale around collective benefits, group purchasing, training & shared
services. Having a union that is greater than your own shop is
important when filing grievances and having a wider reach of agency and
community. When these institutions are worker-owned, and part of an
appropriate economic ecosystem, the balance of power tends to shift
away from moneyed interest and towards federation. This means that
there will generally be less likelihood of strikes and work stoppage.
Just a thought.
Richard
On 02/25/2011 12:39 PM, Patrick Anderson wrote:
The effectiveness of collective bargaining has always been threatened
by independent peers who are willing to accept lower wages and endure
poor working conditions.
For traditional manufacturing jobs, these 'alternate' workers can
usually be kept from accessing the Means of Production by forming a
physical barrier around the worksite or through various threats that
can be carried out because it is easy to monitor who is actually
entering the establishment.
Yet these valuable techniques of intimidation and coercion so vital to
protecting Worker Rights are unlikely to be applicable in the realm of
"immaterial production".
When it comes to something like Free Software, how can we, the
International Programmers of the World, unionize effectively to *stop*
independent programmers from creating the solutions that consumers
need?
This is a catastrophic issue, as many of these independents are
willing to work not just for a low Wage, but for Free! They often fix
bugs and add features without any pay at all!
How can workers in the 'immaterial' sphere possibly "make a living"
with such anarchy and disrespect for organized labor, and with no
ability to stop that production?