Unionization!
- Started
- Last post
- 55 Responses
- ribit0
OK, so this is the 'worldwide union of all creative types' right?
Just think you might want to narrow it down a bit if you really want to make this happen...
- adamfinger0
Ribit, you can call it "soviet" all you want -- and therefore effectively dismiss my comments as the rants of some sheepish "Communinist."
These concerns were raised long before the creation of Soviet Russia (which, if understood as Stalinism, cared next to nothing for the majority of citizens).
I don't think I made any sweeping generalizations. In fact, I stated that in many design studios, owners also work as directors (and therefore serve a necessary role in production). Small business owners (or part-owners as the case may be) are not the core of the problem.
In fact, the salaries of studio-owners is often much much less than those of the clients we work for. But as owners of studios, you have certain business demands which require our being taken advantage of.
We cannot leave it to our bosses to demand more money from clients, to demand longer turnarounds, etc. It hasn't worked in the past.
- tkmeister0
maybe you should be working on improving your skill so you get a job where you get better hours, better benefits.
oh wait, this won't change. you want to change the capitalism, right?
- adamfinger0
ribit,
In regards to your offhanded remark about my sounding like I "really want to be a politician...in 1917," I take offense. Firstly, it is you who is projecting this caricature onto me with your insistence that *I* define what designers *I* am trying to cover, what *I* want to call this union, etc.
I'll agree to call this union whatever its members decide (assuming, for a moment, that designers can be convinced of the need for a union). I simply want to raise these concerns. I want to HELP bring them to the forefront and introduce unionization as a serious consideration.
Although my prime objective was to enlish other designers to help build some sort of website where these concerns can first be addressed. As this is not an individual endeavor, I have no right to make these decisions for what you so callously call "my venture."
Secondly, I object to the fact that you think these concerns are antiquated, perhaps better left to history lessons dealing with the Russian Revolution.
Again, this should be OUR union, where WE (not me) make the decisions, where we negotiate contracts, elect representatives, act together.
While I have no affiliation with WashTech (a union/advocacy organization for IT workers), they have a decent FAQ section that might explain some things.
I have other reference links for those interested.
- ribit0
"yet their status as boss is only possible by first appropriating the wealth WE create"
Such a generalization! (and sort of a 'soviet' generalization)
I was an employed designer for 12 years, and now part-owner in a business that is starting to employ people, and I think I'm still one of the biggest wealth-creators in the company, cordinating a team of other wealth-creators... I dont think I'm 'appropriating wealth' from anyone...
- joyride0
so we all get the same pay? When half the people i've worked with produce crap, day in day out, they have no desire to better them selves. I like free markets personally and think it's a good thing. If your unhappy with a job, find a new one. I'm not gonna strike because joe average has to work an extra 3 hours a week and the union wants to send a message.
- blaw0
i don't really feel that i compete with other designers. i sit down with folks, figure out their needs, hopefully leave them with a feeling that they can trust me to do a good job, act professionally, and give them a big ol' bang for their buck.
then they tell their friends, "that law fellow is a good guy to do business with." etc.
plenty of designers, plenty of clients. look around. most of the world is in dire need of a redesign.
also, it doesn't hurt to assume the attitude that if you lose a job only on price, that's not a bad thing.
- adamfinger0
rafalski,
How "good" can an economy be when it doesn't serve the interests of the majority of the people who must abide by its laws?
You make it seem like bosses are doing us a favor by hiring us in the first place, yet their status as boss is only possible by first appropriating the wealth WE create (there isn't enough room in this tiny window to discussion the dynamics of the market and/or private-ownership of social production).
Strikes are sabotages only insofar as you believe that bosses should have unchecked power and that workers (again, a majority of people) should simply abide by their decisions.
I'm not so sure high rates of unemployment necessarily "makes" people want increased job security, but certainly unemployment coerces workers to exert themselves harder simply to protect their precarious job status. How, then, is this not extortion on the part of business owners to take advantage of this condition?
- chaztoo0
None of this would be an issue if we all joined Amway.
- ribit0
actually I meant more like what type of designers are you trying to cover? what about product designers, architects?broadcast? graphic design, web developers? whos in, whos out?
Key question: what are you calling this union? (naming the it is usually a good way to focus the aim of your venture...)
btw... sounds like you really want to be a politician... in 1917.
- adamfinger0
ribit (and others)...
I am not defining anything. It's not my personal decision to do so. However, unions, as worker's organizations, naturally exclude company owners and managers. Profit, which is the product of our mental effort (even if enjoyable), is appropriated by owners. In return we receive a wage. But because it is not we who have ownership titles and therefore economic and social decision-making rights within the company, we must organize to counterbalance this lopsided social relationship. This has nothing to do with the generosity of certain bosses or the greediness of others. Nor does it have anything to do with our own talents and education. It simply has to do with the objective relationship to social production. One group creates wealth and the other appropriates it.
Depending on the structure of the workplace, however, some supervisors are often permitted in. This is not a black/white issue. In a larger design agency, for example, where the directors are largely divorced from the bulk of designers and who serve mainly to discipline the workforce, than this director would more than likely not be welcome into the union. In a smaller place, however, where the director serves a necessary role within the production process, than he/she would be welcome. In small studios where the owner also serves as creative-director, ownership status would, I assume, preclude him/her from joining.
Freelancers are different. They are technically owner and worker, but because it is only themselves whom they exploit (a tricky concept, one perhaps better left to another discussion), than there is no reason that they shouldn't benefit from unionization. Again, they sell their labor-power to clients who act as their boss, even if only temporarily.
I don't see any reason why any "sort" of designer should be excluded from unionizing. But this doesn't mean that all designers will fall under the same union -- commercial designers may decide to join the Communication Workers of America whereas film and game animators may fall within other unions (I'm unfamiliar with unions in other parts of the world).
More important than these questions, I think, is reversing the anti-social and cut-throat mindset that has been instilled in us by business, whereby we must compete against other designers not for some ethereal advancement of design as some abstract concept, but simply to earn a decent income.
- johndiggity0
most of the problems in our industry are caused simply by a lack of education. not many schools' programs educate students on how the business works once you are in "the shit".
- chaztoo0
I just started freelancing full time in May of this year. I have a bad vibe about unions but I don't know anything about them so I'm not going to speak strongly one way or the other. I'm open to learning more, but as of this second and my grasp of the concept, I don't like the idea of anyone telling me how to perform, who to perform with or when to perform it. If I was part of a union and could muscle my unwilling clients or employer to perform a certain way, that might be nice, but then that would mean they could tell me to do a thing a certain way, and that would blow my mind. That may come off as defiant and not playing well with others, but it's my knee-jerk response.
Help me understand why I shouldn't hate it.
- rafalski0
I couldn't agree more, blaw. I am a paid worker now and I still am strongly against unions. I believe the fact that hiring and firing is easy where I live is one of the reasons the economy is on the rise - unlike in places where unions are strong.
In Europe people can go on strike, cause their employer losses and still cannot get fired (afair a full lock-out is allowed in UK only). I see this kind of strike as a sabotage or extortion, with bad impact on economy.
I don't consider employment a human right (as the French like to see it), it's a contract between adults. If you don't like the conditions, renegotiate or quit. Of course, if the job market is bad, you're not in a position you can quit and you unhapily agree with the conditions. But unions are one of the reasons job market shrinks..
High unemployment makes people want increased job security and so on.. It's a downward spiral. IMO, of course.
- ribit0
how are you defining who is in this union? what sort of designers?
- johndiggity0
break free of those chains which bind you brother.
- adamfinger0
Rand (and a few others)...
You don't REALLY work for yourself. Your income is dependent upon your expenditure of mental energy on clients, not your own projects. That you might chose your clients doesn't alter this relationship. It just changes the appearance and makes its a bit more convoluted. Your clients hire you to make them more money. You may work hard and you may be incredibly talented, but your clients answer first and foremost to profits. This is the core of the market. This means that, in staying competitive, they will cut costs wherever possible -- that of their designers included. There will always be more designers (and workers in general) than there are bosses, studio-heads and clients.
Our competing with one another doesn't serve our interests. It can only bring down our incomes, our benefits, and our leisure-time. Getting by in this industry, especially for freelancers, means working harder and harder to bring home a paycheck. How is it rational for designers to buy into this? We could be working drastically shorter days, thus giving us more time to work on our own projects, to be creative on our own terms.
Simply looking for a new job, even one outside the industry, is no guarantee that things will improve. Many of these problems are experienced in all sectors. Moreover, the idea of "personal advancement" as a solvent flies in the face of collective action, which has thus far been the only tool to bring about serious change. As those responsible for doing the work, we shouldn't simply cross our fingers and hope there are "generous" bosses out there willing to compensate us "fairly."
Also, don't confuse a college degree, a professional title, or so-called "self-employment" as reasons not to unionize. There are unions for teachers, freelance writers, professors, office workers, IT professionals, health care workers, actors, film workers, etc. Many animators in Hollywood enjoy unions and for a long time, so did commercial artists.
- blaw0
given the opportunity in the past, i've always voted against unionizing. i still feel that's the correct vote.
to summarize... if you are unhappy with your current situation, do something about it (ie: find a new job).
- Rand0
didn't mean to make light of this... I work for myself and have no employees, though
- adamfinger0
tkmeister-
Finances is not always the most important issue. I'm okay with my pay, but I'm not okay with my hours. Workers today, and certainly including designers, work hours comparable to that of 100 years ago. In return, we get the fewest days of vacation of any western country and we get poor social services in return. This is not progress.
Plus being "smart" with your money when the disparity of wealth is so great sounds a lot like capitulation -- simply learning to live with what we get.
According to the 2006 AIGA Salary Survey and the U.S. Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics, designer's aren't that well off. Mid-level salaries are around $40,000-$45,000. Even when its more, the hours required to earn that money plus the high cost of living translates into a real wage that's much less.