A decidedly old economy concept has recently turned heads in the heart of the new economy.
Once considered models of free-agency, independence and career ownership, some disenchanted IT workers have lately been pondering the benefits of unions and collective action.
There have been a number of high-profile moves by staff to organize at dotcom companies such as amazon.com and etown.com, as well as at established firms like IBM.
Online discussions on cio.com (management) and techrepublic.com (IT workers) have generated hundreds of responses and heated debates. Is this a sign of things to come in the high-tech industry?
Historically, unions have been the “voice” of the worker in areas where workers had few, if any, options for independent negotiation with management.
In areas where the job doesn’t change, where skill requirements are limited or static, where workers are interchangeable, where there is little or no opportunity for advancement, and where the labour supply is abundant, unscrupulous management can easily take advantage of workers. In these situations, unions are the workers’ defence against management.
Unions tend to have a much lower penetration rate in industries or businesses which require more specialized education, which change rapidly, where workers can advance through the hierarchy of the organization or where skill shortages exist.
In these cases, the workers have the ability to negotiate for themselves and the option of easily moving to other employers if they are not happy with working conditions.
Even though IT is a relatively young industry there are very few businesses today that do not rely heavily on technology and therefore IT workers.
Yet even in unionized industries, IT staff often are not members of the local union. In the U.S., where nearly 14 per cent of workers are union members, just 4.4 per cent of IT workers carry union cards. An informal poll of members of the Canadian Information Processing Society (CIPS, a professional society for IT workers in Canada) revealed similarly low union membership. Generally only government IT shops, or those that have previous or existing ties to government, such as universities, are unionized and even then it is often only at junior levels.
Information technology is a very faced-paced, rapidly changing environment where today’s “hot” skills can be obsolete tomorrow. People who find their skills in high demand find they hold the balance of power in employment relationships.
Software Human Resource Council studies of the labour market indicate that these people are still the norm and not the exception. There is a shortage of up to 200,000 IT workers in Canada. Because of that, few workers see a need for a union. In fact, many IT workers feel that union membership would be an impediment to their career and salary growth; they relish the ability to negotiate their own terms and to quickly move up the corporate ladder.
During the CIPS poll, one member replied: “I don’t believe IT professionals should want to be unionized. To me, being part of a union means that one sees oneself as a labour commodity — something that can be easily replaced by another ‘Borg’ with basically the same skills and knowledge. Not exactly what I think of when I think of professionals.”
And yet others, such as those at amazon.com and etown.com, obviously feel they need a union to support them.
Perhaps there is an emerging distinction about IT workers that hinges upon notions of professionalism. IT began as a very specialized skill: those who entered the career early often had math or physics degrees.
Later, computing science degrees and diplomas became standard. Most of these well-educated practitioners considered IT to be a profession.
In fact, the ISP designation (Information Systems Professional of Canada) is based on an education in computer sciences or management information systems and significant professional level experience.
Today, a wide variety of schools and programs attempt to attract people into the “high-paying world of IT.”
These programs offer intensive technical training for a few months and produce technicians who are highly skilled in the current technology and who can help alleviate the skills shortage at the technical level but who have limited ability to advance within an organization.
In most cases and by most definitions, these graduates would not be considered professionals and would not qualify for professional certification. These people might feel more need for a union.
IT is rapidly becoming part of most business functions and many employees need varying degrees of IT skills — most as users, some as technical experts.
As IT skills proliferate throughout the organization, management and HR should consider the distinction between technicians and professionals.
IT is no longer a single entity; it’s not just the “geeks” in the computer room, it has permeated many roles and many segments of the organization. In some cases, the “techies” are just that — technicians. The employees at amazon.com and etown.com who attempted to organize were customer service reps — technically trained people with little opportunity to advance in their positions or to move into other roles in the company.
They complained of mandatory overtime, erratic schedules, pay raises that were promised but not given and a constantly changing business model. At amazon.com, employees had accepted lower pay in exchange for stock options; when the dotcom bubble burst, the stock options lost much of their value. In other cases, the “techies” are much more then just techies — they’re professionals who bring a broad background in education and experience to their role.
Even in the current high-tech slowdown, these professionals rarely feel trapped in their positions. They are able to negotiate their terms of employment, or to move on to other companies if they are unhappy — very few feel the need for a union to protect them.
In fact, at the Alberta Research Council, IT staff actively fought against being brought into a union.
Management and HR departments should be aware that not all IT workers are the same: some will see their jobs as just jobs and may look to unions to protect them; others will see their jobs as careers that they are able to manage for themselves.
Unions might be right for some of these people, but they will not be right for all. We need to distinguish between the groups and treat them appropriately.
Faye West is the director of information systems at the Alberta Research Council and past-president of the Canadian Information Processing Society. She can be reached at [email protected]
Once considered models of free-agency, independence and career ownership, some disenchanted IT workers have lately been pondering the benefits of unions and collective action.
There have been a number of high-profile moves by staff to organize at dotcom companies such as amazon.com and etown.com, as well as at established firms like IBM.
Online discussions on cio.com (management) and techrepublic.com (IT workers) have generated hundreds of responses and heated debates. Is this a sign of things to come in the high-tech industry?
Historically, unions have been the “voice” of the worker in areas where workers had few, if any, options for independent negotiation with management.
In areas where the job doesn’t change, where skill requirements are limited or static, where workers are interchangeable, where there is little or no opportunity for advancement, and where the labour supply is abundant, unscrupulous management can easily take advantage of workers. In these situations, unions are the workers’ defence against management.
Unions tend to have a much lower penetration rate in industries or businesses which require more specialized education, which change rapidly, where workers can advance through the hierarchy of the organization or where skill shortages exist.
In these cases, the workers have the ability to negotiate for themselves and the option of easily moving to other employers if they are not happy with working conditions.
Even though IT is a relatively young industry there are very few businesses today that do not rely heavily on technology and therefore IT workers.
Yet even in unionized industries, IT staff often are not members of the local union. In the U.S., where nearly 14 per cent of workers are union members, just 4.4 per cent of IT workers carry union cards. An informal poll of members of the Canadian Information Processing Society (CIPS, a professional society for IT workers in Canada) revealed similarly low union membership. Generally only government IT shops, or those that have previous or existing ties to government, such as universities, are unionized and even then it is often only at junior levels.
Information technology is a very faced-paced, rapidly changing environment where today’s “hot” skills can be obsolete tomorrow. People who find their skills in high demand find they hold the balance of power in employment relationships.
Software Human Resource Council studies of the labour market indicate that these people are still the norm and not the exception. There is a shortage of up to 200,000 IT workers in Canada. Because of that, few workers see a need for a union. In fact, many IT workers feel that union membership would be an impediment to their career and salary growth; they relish the ability to negotiate their own terms and to quickly move up the corporate ladder.
During the CIPS poll, one member replied: “I don’t believe IT professionals should want to be unionized. To me, being part of a union means that one sees oneself as a labour commodity — something that can be easily replaced by another ‘Borg’ with basically the same skills and knowledge. Not exactly what I think of when I think of professionals.”
And yet others, such as those at amazon.com and etown.com, obviously feel they need a union to support them.
Perhaps there is an emerging distinction about IT workers that hinges upon notions of professionalism. IT began as a very specialized skill: those who entered the career early often had math or physics degrees.
Later, computing science degrees and diplomas became standard. Most of these well-educated practitioners considered IT to be a profession.
In fact, the ISP designation (Information Systems Professional of Canada) is based on an education in computer sciences or management information systems and significant professional level experience.
Today, a wide variety of schools and programs attempt to attract people into the “high-paying world of IT.”
These programs offer intensive technical training for a few months and produce technicians who are highly skilled in the current technology and who can help alleviate the skills shortage at the technical level but who have limited ability to advance within an organization.
In most cases and by most definitions, these graduates would not be considered professionals and would not qualify for professional certification. These people might feel more need for a union.
IT is rapidly becoming part of most business functions and many employees need varying degrees of IT skills — most as users, some as technical experts.
As IT skills proliferate throughout the organization, management and HR should consider the distinction between technicians and professionals.
IT is no longer a single entity; it’s not just the “geeks” in the computer room, it has permeated many roles and many segments of the organization. In some cases, the “techies” are just that — technicians. The employees at amazon.com and etown.com who attempted to organize were customer service reps — technically trained people with little opportunity to advance in their positions or to move into other roles in the company.
They complained of mandatory overtime, erratic schedules, pay raises that were promised but not given and a constantly changing business model. At amazon.com, employees had accepted lower pay in exchange for stock options; when the dotcom bubble burst, the stock options lost much of their value. In other cases, the “techies” are much more then just techies — they’re professionals who bring a broad background in education and experience to their role.
Even in the current high-tech slowdown, these professionals rarely feel trapped in their positions. They are able to negotiate their terms of employment, or to move on to other companies if they are unhappy — very few feel the need for a union to protect them.
In fact, at the Alberta Research Council, IT staff actively fought against being brought into a union.
Management and HR departments should be aware that not all IT workers are the same: some will see their jobs as just jobs and may look to unions to protect them; others will see their jobs as careers that they are able to manage for themselves.
Unions might be right for some of these people, but they will not be right for all. We need to distinguish between the groups and treat them appropriately.
Faye West is the director of information systems at the Alberta Research Council and past-president of the Canadian Information Processing Society. She can be reached at [email protected]
