Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

GEEK Unions?

Posted by JonKatz on Tue Jul 06, 1999 09:00 AM
from the geeks-of-the-world-unite dept.
The "Head Geek" at a U.S. High School wonders if geeks might band together in a powerhouse techno-union to represent their interests and fight Luddite blockheads in journalism and politics. It's a great idea, especially if they never try and meet.

Aaron Scott writes that he's the "Head Geek" at his high school, which means that he works for the tech administrator doing IT work and coordinating the other work study nerds.

"As you may imagine, we catch a lot of flack from other students because we spend so much time and energy on the computers at school, not to mention our own machines at home," he explains.

When this happens, he says, "one of the things we do to shrug it off is to joke that if they didn't have us to keep their computers running, the school would cease to function." This belief, he says, is not altogether untrue.

Aaron says he was watching the movie "Dune" one light last week "It occurred to me that what is true of my school is also true of other organizations, from small businesses to the federal government. Just like the Freemen in the movie stopped the universe by stopping the export of Spice, if computer geeks stopped working en masse, the whole country, and even the world, would grind to a halt." Aaron was thinking in particular of how geek politicization might help fight actions like the recent Australian government efforts to censor websites in that country.

How would this work, wondered Aaron? Could some Teamster-like union arise to work on matters of importance to geeks?

Aaron's fantasy, as it happens, is widely shared. When geek began to become a positive rather than negative term in the 90's, geeks and nerds alike began to talk about some form of Geek Union to battle the various corporations thundering onto the Internet, the blockheads in Congress with a penchant who passed the Communications Decency Acts to curb free speech, (or who, more recently wanted to post the Ten Commandments in schools to ward off Geek Evil).

There was talk, too, of a Geek Truth Squad to combat phobic media reporting about the Net, from mis-representations about what hackers really do and are to the alleged perils of game-playing, to the supposed ubiquity of perverts and pornographers online.

One manifestation of that early movement - geekforce.org - surfaced again during the post-Littleton hysteria.

Efforts to organize geeks have proven difficult. The Net population is idiosyncratic, wildly diverse. Many find the very idea of a geek organization too similar to the posturing and rule-making of the offline world. Efforts to form broad-based political communities online have all been quickly done in by epidemic online hostility. Anybody's who's tried to participate in public discussion of online issues knows to expect flamers swarming like fire ants.

But Aaron has a point, and it's significant one, particularly timely around the Fourth of July. Geeks are increasingly becoming a separate entity. They are no longer on the margins of life; they are at its epicenter, running the systems that run the world. Few corporate, political, governmental or educational institutions could function for long without them. And many, like Aaron, yearn for some sort of political community.

Aaron is definitely in the vanguard of a social revolution. There are "Head Geeks" at every school, college, modern company and organization in every technologically - advanced country in the world. They are now among the world's only truly indispensable workers. Nobody would have paid much attention to them a decade ago. Now, people mutter at their special privileges (they never, ever have to wear ties, and can wander school hallways at will) and at the fact that they are increasingly relied on to operate the system - whatever it is - that governs work and business.

If they ever did band together, they would constitute a powerful, communicative and influential political force, especially as Presidential elections edge closer. It might even make the increasingly-persistent efforts to corporatize, profit from, politically exploit fears of, and censor the Net politically untenable. If even a small number of geeks around the country were to call in sick, for example, the next time Congress passes some noxious law curbing free speech, or journalism promoted unthinking hysteria as it did post- Littleton, our political and journalistic institutions might, however briefly, be forced to act rationally and sanely. Idiocy and hypocrisy would become dangerous instead of politically advantageous: they'd cost money and disrupt business.

Maybe Aaron's idea could work this way: Geeks could form a Union. They could agree upon a narrow, simple agenda: freedom, the sharing of technology and the advancement of neat stuff.

It might work, as long as the geeks don't ever meet in person, ask for or pay dues, adopt by-laws or regulations, or even think about choosing leaders.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
GEEK UNION? | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 214 comments (Spill at 50!) | Index Only | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1) | 2 | 3
  • Sane Hours? by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @05:10AM
  • Missing the Point? by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @05:33AM
  • Re:"Few" indispensable vocations? by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @06:04AM
  • Ever heard of the IEEE? by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @06:55AM
  • Re:Missing the Point? by Anonymous Coward (Score:2) Tuesday July 06 1999, @05:59AM
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 06 1999, @06:46AM (#1816726)
    Let me spank your whelping .edu butt for a moment.

    Geeks don't command anything. We are the labor that builds products and keeps the systems running much like many of the other occupations mentioned above. Granted we are *highly* skilled and educated laborers with a diversity that allows us to get ahead by the three methods you describe, but you can only get so far. You, individualy, will never be the "boss' or "commander" or "policy setter" or any other position that wields the power to make signifigant changes (i.e. management or operations). If you think that is not the case, explain to me how you would go about enacting change *individually* other then walking out the door. We don't decide when and who to layoff and what our salaries are to be (granted we can negotiate and choose not to take a job, but thats not nearly the same).

    If you do not beleive me you need to spend several years consorting with management, sales, marketing, accounting, etc... The image that they possess of us will *truly* frighten you. Attitudes of: no employee is irreplacable (which is truer then you think in say 95% of the cases), younger workers are *far* more productive then ones who are 20 years older, younger workers are far cheaper (timewise and moneywise and overheadwise) then older workers, why pay for the wise, experienced, and business savvy worker at twice the price when I can hire two much less experienced, naieve ones who will outperform, outwork, have more current knowledge then the old at just a little bit higer price (say 85k vs 2x50k, but instead of 40-60 hours a week, we get 80 to 120!). Hearing stuff like the makes me quake in my boots. Remember folks compared to the youngings there are very few 40+ year old techies out there.

    This is a boom time for us. We should make the most of it. Perhaps not a union but a professional organization that accredits us like the Bar association, or the AMA, and forces tech workers to keep their skills current and ensures the quality of our work. From that we could gain lobbying forces and political power.
    Anti-organisation people are bitching about mediocratity and seniority set slary levels?
    Let me ask you something, a semi-literate auto worker who punches buttons on a machine all day should probably be making $7/hr, but the industry average is $22/hr, with nearly the *best* health benefits in the USA. Thats over 3x salary inflation. Think about what that would be like for organised technical labor. Do not know about you, but I would not mind making a minimum of $60/hr.

    Tell me what will happen when (not if) the economy takes a dive.

    Will management say "hmmm we can keep the folks we are sponsoring for visas and not give them raises this year, they are not going anywhere else" (don't take this a a nationalistic slur, I have actually heard a proiject manager and a operations manager refer to visa'ed employees as "indentured servants").

    Will they say: "hmmm, we need to make cutbacks, layoff 95% of all labor making $60k+, include the contractors in that lot too" (if you think contractors do well in recessions, think again).

    Or will they say "gee lets kill off our marketing and sales team, who cares if nobody knows about or buys our products, that wont hurt us".

    Or "we could lay off our top earning sales guys, imagine the bonus money we would save! Of course our top sales guys usually do bring in the most amount of money."

    Or "lets gut our accounting department so we cannot track any of our revenue?"

    Think about it, and think about it hard. They don't think like we do, so we have to think like them.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 06 1999, @05:01AM (#1816727)
    Jon, I don't think so. *Most* vocations, perhaps outside of advertising and entertainment, are indispensable; to think that one's own job is vastly more important in that way reeks of hubris.
    Ever read a short story titled something like "Keep the Roads Rolling", featuring workers trying to blackmail society?

    Let's think about this. How 'bout:
    * teachers
    * sanitation engineers
    * police
    * soldiers
    * highway maintenance
    * farmers
    * truck drivers
    * roustabouts
    * telecom workers
    * food/drug testers

    Well, guess none of them are necessary and geeks are "special". Wow! *SMACK*
  • No, NO a thousand times, NO! by BOredAtWork (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @02:39PM
  • I see a lot of people complaining about this idea, comparing it to the other more traditional "unions" that exist today. Re-read what Katz has to say and you'll discover that the proposal is for a loose federation, at best, and certainly not a full-blown dues-paying labor-centric union.

    Learn to read. Read to learn.

    - A.P.
    --


    "One World, One Web, One Program" - Microsoft Promotional Ad

  • Re:Atlas Shrugged by Interlocutor (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @05:08AM
  • This ain't The Jungle... by Joseph Vigneau (Score:2) Tuesday July 06 1999, @05:22AM
  • Don't Unionize, For a political party! by farrellj (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @08:57AM
  • Why Do I Have a Bad Feeling About This? by gavinhall (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @06:12AM
  • Zooom!! As it passes over our heads! by gavinhall (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @06:55AM
  • Re:Geek Union Strikes by gavinhall (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @07:30AM
  • Re:Why Do I Have a Bad Feeling About This? by gavinhall (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @08:22AM
  • It never pays to assume such things by gavinhall (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @06:58PM
  • Re:Slashdot has no central authority? by gavinhall (Score:1) Wednesday July 07 1999, @06:27AM
  • Much dreamage, no? by pingouin (Score:2) Tuesday July 06 1999, @04:49AM
  • Geek Union Strikes by Simon (Score:2) Tuesday July 06 1999, @05:23AM
  • Re:finally by Wansu (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @08:35AM
  • Re:Technical Trade Unions by Brian Knotts (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @07:06AM
  • We don't need no stinking unions by smartin (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @05:13AM
  • Re:We don't need no stinking unions by smartin (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @08:20AM
  • Any other suggestions? by Danse (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @11:51AM
  • by sjames (1099) on Tuesday July 06 1999, @06:58AM (#1816746) Homepage

    I notice that most people are thinking (unfavorably) labor union here. I agree that most geek jobs are better than average. The exceptions can be delt with locally since unlike factory work, replacement employees could take weeks to come up to speed on a project if everyone walks.

    Political unions are another matter. Geeks to polititians: 'You want key escrow huh? Imagine that, the entire worlds newsgroups accidentally got dumped into your email'. 'That's your final word on strong encryption? Now I wonder why *.com quit working?'.

    Or perhaps conversations like:

    • FBI: yes, we're calling about our federally mandated random wiretap equipment.
    • Geek: OK, how can I help you?
    • FBI: All we get from the taps is Sam Kennison screaming like a madman. Can you fix it?
    • Geek: I have no idea why the entire population is screaming like Sam Kennison, you'll have to cal a psychologist or a sociologist. Have a nice day!

    The examples are based on the US, but could apply anywhere. "I really don't know why the filters are blocking everything but porn and the PeeWee Herman home page, I could DISCONNECT them for you."

    The question in my mind is wether or not a Geek political union could get enough solidarity on ANY issue to pull it off. As someone here pointed out, the general lack of solidarity would help avoid silly responses to silly issues.

  • Thoughts on unions by jd (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @07:34AM
  • Professional Organizations and Unions by David Jensen (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @08:42AM
  • same place, similar idea, different time by JimBobJoe (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @06:04PM
  • Geek Union != solution by tgd (Score:2) Tuesday July 06 1999, @07:30AM
  • Re:Try "Association of Professional Programmers" by neb (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @10:59AM
  • There is more to Geekhood than Distrobutions. by Petra (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @04:47AM
  • I used to be in UFCW. by Jeremiah (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @02:04PM
  • Other reasons for unionization by aqua (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @07:48AM
  • Re:UFCW by kevin lyda (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @04:49AM
  • Re:Geek "unions" : Semantic reframing solution by otis wildflower (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @10:20AM
  • Getting Big Brother's attention by Brian Stretch (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @01:48PM
  • Re:UFCW by Ares (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @05:30AM
  • Very Timely by atporter (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @08:26AM
  • Re:The (m)eek shall inherit the earth...? by greg_barton (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @06:16AM
  • Fraternal Order of Geeks =... by unitron (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @01:38PM
  • What racial slurs?!? by unitron (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @01:55PM
  • R.I.P. Lord Sutch by unitron (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @02:01PM
  • That book was "The Peter Principle" by unitron (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @02:16PM
  • Jon, all is forgiven (for now) by unitron (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @02:35PM
  • Like herding cats... by lungofish (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @06:49AM
  • Gee, sounds like you want... by Rob Riggs (Score:2) Tuesday July 06 1999, @06:52AM
  • Re: A guild, not a Union by washort (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @09:57AM
  • Re:The (m)eek shall inherit the earth...? by Signal 11 (Score:2) Tuesday July 06 1999, @06:11AM
  • by Signal 11 (7608) on Tuesday July 06 1999, @05:37AM (#1816770)
    The idea has been kicked around on several listservs, as well as among a few of my friends. You're not the first one to notice the discrepancy between geek "workplace rights", and others. We're the ones usually staying well into the evening when the server crashes, we're the ones called in on holidays when a project is running late. Holiday vacation? Yeah, right - not until you finish your Y2K work.

    Geeks may be getting the highest pay, but arguably the lowest QoS in the workplace. Stock options aren't as important to most of us as doing stuff we like to do - namely hacking code, gaming, and just having fun online. All those things are routinely forbidden in today's modern workplace.. where productivity reigns king.

    The 1930's through to about the mid 60's brought in organized unions for the masses - auto workers, factory workers, ad nauseum. It was the unions that created public education - to ensure that their kids got the same right to an education that a rich person did.

    Those unions were smashed to pieces by cunning political moves, corruption, and plain stupidity on the part of union leaders, and the whole thing slid off into the sea, never to be heard from again.

    Most unions today are technical in nature - high demand workers who cannot easily be replaced. Plumbers, electricians, teachers. Government unions are also common - Airlines, Postal Workers, etc. This definately speaks something to the legitimacy of organizing a geek union.

    I do believe it's possible. Geeks have shown repeatedly an interest in having their fair share of the pie in political issues. Strangely enough though, when pressed, they seem apathetic and indifferent - preferring to talk about the issues, but would rather not invest the time - "I'd rather be coding" would make a fine bumper sticker on most geekmobiles.

    I honestly don't know whether it's possible. Technical unions are usually the most successful due to high demand and low availability. The question is - can you really herd cats? Can you convince the geeks of the world to unite in a shared vision (a better workplace)?

    Contact me at this [mailto] address if you'd like to talk more.

    --
  • Re:Good god no! by SimonK (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @11:36AM
  • Re:finally by spiritu (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @05:13AM
  • Re:We don't need no stinking unions by Software Cowboy (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @11:56AM
  • Re:What racial slurs?!? by Software Cowboy (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @04:49PM
  • Better that a union for us .... by roethavin (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @08:38AM
  • "The Time Machine" anyone? by korc (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @05:44AM
  • Union-like job opportunities already exist by sp- (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @05:55AM
  • Re:We don't need a union, we need lobbyists. by IntlHarvester (Score:2) Tuesday July 06 1999, @01:23PM
  • Atlas Shrugged by JoeD (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @04:53AM
  • And you thought OLD unions were bad??? by wall (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @08:25AM
  • Re:Atlas Shrugged by Bucko (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @07:01AM
  • Re:UFCW: What is this 5 days rubbish? by Sly Mongoose (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @05:33AM
  • Re:Dumb Idea-No Grounding In Economic Reality by Maffu (Score:1) Wednesday July 07 1999, @08:05AM
  • Solving problems... by Bryan Andersen (Score:1) Wednesday July 07 1999, @04:37AM
  • Geek by PsykhoKiwi (Score:1) Wednesday July 07 1999, @02:23AM
  • Union, or trade association? by Slamtilt (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @06:27AM
  • Union, trade association or PAC? by drox (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @11:37AM
  • public education by great om (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @10:33PM
  • Please, no... by wesmills (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @05:32AM
  • Re:The international Geek union by pinko (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @02:29PM
  • While i agree... by pinko (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @02:39PM
  • Re:Geek strikes by umoto (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @06:06AM
  • Future Union/Cultures ...? by OldHawk777 (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @03:03PM
  • Wake up and smell the roses. by eann (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @10:51AM
  • Antitrust law precludes Geek Union by NeilO (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @06:53PM
  • Re:Geek unions by bliss (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @05:15AM
  • Re:We don't need no stinking unions by bliss (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @05:22AM
  • Re:Why Do I Have a Bad Feeling About This? by bliss (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @06:28AM
  • Re:think outside the box for once by Rombuu (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @10:16AM
  • Roustabouts by mtngrown (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @05:46AM
  • Re:"Geek Union" is an Oxymoron by ConceptJunkie (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @06:34AM
  • Re:We don't need no stinking unions by ConceptJunkie (Score:2) Tuesday July 06 1999, @06:22AM
  • by ConceptJunkie (24823) on Tuesday July 06 1999, @05:58AM (#1816804) Homepage Journal
    While I recognize that unions might be useful for those workers who on their own are not particularly powerful vis-a-vis employers (i.e., not well educated or skilled and therefore have few options, or narrowly skilled, also few options), and that employers can and do screw people with impunity, the idea of a programmer's union (whatever you want to call it) is absolutely abhorent to me, and I imagine most people I know and certainly anyone I would want to work with.

    If I don't like my working conditions, I will find a job that better suits me. I wield considerable power in the marketplace to demand a certain salary and working conditions based on the fact that I am competent, have a good repututation and am honest.

    While recognizing that unions do serve a good purpose for some, I would think in my field they would only serve to as a shelter for the incompetenent and lazy and could only hurt me by limiting the options I could exercise in a free market.

    Furthermore, I have found that in the business world, the best guarantee for screwing yourself is to rely on others. I would stand nothing to gain by such a propostion and everything to lose... so much so that I would rather switch careers than be forced to join a union.

    As far as the press goes, mass ignorance will always be with us. Anyone who doesn't understand that 90% of the press is made up of people too stupid to do real work (compare requirements for a journalism degree with anything other than an education degree and see what I mean) and legitimate and worthwhile journalism is being pushed further and further into the fringes. I generally find the level of intelligence expressed on slashdot to equal or exceed most newspaper columnists (and certainly reporters), particularly since I can see so many viewpoints easily.

    Ignorance is a fact of life, and I don't really give a d*mn what people at large think since they will always misunderstand someone like me anyway.



  • finally by l4m3 (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @04:48AM
  • Geek "unions" : Semantic reframing solution by Randym (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @07:42AM
  • Why It Won't Work by Omegalomaniac (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @12:17PM
  • The the famous Brett Watson ... by mrgrumpy (Score:2) Tuesday July 06 1999, @05:40PM
  • pay according to value by davedavedave (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @06:01AM
  • Re:We don't need no stinking unions by Rinikusu (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @01:50PM
  • by alkali (28338) on Tuesday July 06 1999, @10:15AM (#1816811)
    The Idea that anyone should pay an organization a monthly fee for the privilege of mediating in contract negotiations is ridiculous!

    What's ridiculous about it? People hire intermediaries for negotiating purposes (attorneys, brokers, agents, auctioneers, group purchasing organizations, etc.) all the time.

    [General rule: 90% of the complaints people have about unions would be self-evidently dismissed as ridiculous if they were directed at an entity that dealt in widgets instead of labor.]

  • We don't need a union, we need lobbyists. by Your_name_here (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @08:01AM
  • Good god no! (Score:4)

    by tenor (29482) on Tuesday July 06 1999, @05:14AM (#1816813)
    The last thing we need is a union. Unions homogenize the workforce. You get x dollars per hour, no matter how good/terrible you are. What we need is performance-based pay, and no sane union would ask for that. Unions are the antithesis of geek demands. Unions demand uniformity in workplace conditions. Geeks demand flexibility. Unions demand standard pay scales. We like to see 15% pay increases. Unions cater to the average worker. Geeks despite mediocrity.

    Really, are we as geeks that mistreated at work? For the most part I agree that the accounting departments of the world loathe us, but who cares? When I meet people outside of work and they learn that I'm a software engineer, they are always very impressed and excited to talk to me. That shows respect right there. Managers are afraid to lose us, as they know that we keep the machines running and the software coming. That gives us amazing leverage right there. Any of you ever wriggled a few extra vacation days out of your manager? Wondered why he/she gave in? Ever notice that most geeks only work about 70% of the time? Try that at McDonalds. Although that would be par for a union job... :)
  • More to unions then strikes. by bil (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @07:39AM
  • used to be my .sig by Wah (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @06:03AM
  • Lies.org by adimarco (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @07:21AM
  • BOFH Tactics by DonkPunch (Score:2) Tuesday July 06 1999, @07:11AM
  • A real Y2K party! by D3 (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @06:36AM
  • Perhaps a trade organization... by Izaak (Score:2) Tuesday July 06 1999, @08:07AM
  • Geek unions by Mendenhall (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @05:08AM
  • Re:"Few" indispensable vocations? by shaum (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @01:11PM
  • by dr_strang (32799) on Tuesday July 06 1999, @04:59AM (#1816822)
    Now THAT would be funny, if there had been a typo, and it was really "The GEEK shall inherit the earth".


    doc
  • Re:UFCW by itachi (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @07:56AM
  • Re:We don't need no stinking unions by schussat (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @06:08AM
  • FORCE Gov't to use the net in public. NO TV. by cynicthe (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @06:39AM
  • He left out slashdot. /. isn't in the revolution? by cynicthe (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @06:51AM
  • MASSADVERTISE! by cynicthe (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @11:32AM
  • Without us, they wouldn't exist.With us, obsolete. by cynicthe (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @06:54PM
  • Organizing a Geek Political Interest Group by BeIshmael (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @07:55AM
  • Re:"Few" indispensable vocations? by -stax (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @05:13AM
  • Conflicting Goals... by DoktorMel (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @06:46AM
  • Hmmm... by WorldMaker (Score:1) Wednesday July 07 1999, @07:03AM
  • Re:Technocratic Party by BitPoet (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @06:21AM
  • Why a geek union would be impossible by DIR (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @08:01PM
  • Re:The international Geek union by Malcontent (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @05:54AM
  • Re:The international Geek union by Digital_Fiend (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @09:30PM
  • Re:UFCW by Digital_Fiend (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @09:39PM
  • Re:dune is not like real life, sorry by Digital_Fiend (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @10:17PM
  • Re:Don't Unionize, For a political party! by is not (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @10:40AM
  • Re:Please, no... by gonzocanuck (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @05:53AM
  • Re:Try "Association of Professional Programmers" by civilizedINTENSITY (Score:1) Saturday July 10 1999, @05:28PM
  • Re:Good god no! by civilizedINTENSITY (Score:1) Saturday July 10 1999, @05:36PM
  • Re:Perhaps a trade organization... by civilizedINTENSITY (Score:1) Saturday July 10 1999, @05:43PM
  • Re:UFCW - geek version of a union by civilizedINTENSITY (Score:1) Saturday July 10 1999, @05:52PM
  • Technocratic Party by oneiros27 (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @05:29AM
  • Re:The revolution happened without you by Mr. Slippery (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @06:31AM
  • Re:We don't need no stinking unions by Mr. Slippery (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @06:53AM
  • Re:Technocratic Party by Mr. Slippery (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @07:18AM
  • Re:Why Do I Have a Bad Feeling About This? by Mr. Slippery (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @07:36AM
  • Re:Good god no! by Varlic (Score:1) Wednesday July 07 1999, @12:06AM
  • Re:We don't need no stinking unions by forii (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @02:17PM
  • heh by Hard_Code (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @07:54AM
  • Slashdot has no central authority? by Error 404 (Score:1) Wednesday July 07 1999, @03:39AM
  • Eliminate Fear and Irrationality? Wake Up! by LollyR (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @05:29AM
  • Re:"Few" indispensable vocations? by qmrf (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @05:46AM
  • Representative Government Non Sequeter.. by Galilei (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @11:47AM
  • Re:The international Geek union by Jay Maynard (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @04:44AM
  • Look to the UK by xmedar (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @05:37AM
  • Re:Publicize Bad Companies - IRC? by Velox_SwiftFox (Score:1) Wednesday July 07 1999, @02:17AM
  • Re:dune is not like real life, sorry by Shadowcaster (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @05:52PM
  • Re:dune is not like real life, sorry by Shadowcaster (Score:1) Wednesday July 07 1999, @03:58PM
  • The international Geek union by ian_d (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @04:35AM
  • Re:Geek Union != solution by Ristoril (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @09:59AM
  • Union Goals by Ristoril (Score:2) Tuesday July 06 1999, @05:14AM
  • Re:Good god no! by FreeYourSoftware (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @08:51AM
  • Re:UFCW by sputum_sucker (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @04:54AM
  • Re:UFCW by sputum_sucker (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @04:55AM
  • UFCW by sputum_sucker (Score:2) Tuesday July 06 1999, @04:41AM
  • Why segregate yourselves? by dennisp (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @06:15PM
  • In the USA the Organization is Already Here! by TCook (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @05:59PM
  • Re:Dumb Idea-No Grounding In Economic Reality by shadowfax (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @05:10AM
  • Getting geeks outside. (NOT!) by Super Lemming (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @07:54AM
  • Re:Roustabouts by SaDan (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @07:08AM
  • Re:UFCW - geek version of a union by Detroit (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @11:28AM
  • Re:Technocratic Party - not a bad idea by Gord.ca (Score:1) Tuesday July 06 1999, @01:25PM
  • 60 replies beneath your current threshold.
(1) | 2 | 3