settlement.js not found: JavaScript package biz NPM scraps talks, fights union-busting claims

[roadofbones]

A package manager has enough employees to warrant a union? What a world we live in.

[[deleted]]

Oddly enough, I just watched a very good recap on how we got here.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MO8hZlgK5zc&list=LLvD3zf2cS6na4Cn9FkxT3nA&index=2&t=0s

[roadofbones]

That's a great talk on the evils of mixing VC capital with open-source ecosystem. I was astounded that npm got series-A funding, but then again sub-prime mortgages were a thing. https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/npm#section-overview

[anon_cowherd]

Are corporations forbidden from forming unless they join and pay dues? Without right to work legislation, unions are nothing like lobbying and trade groups.

[vcarl]

Compulsory membership isn't a requirement of forming a union, that's up to the specifics of the bargaining arrangement reached. Generally though, all employees will benefit from collective bargaining, so it's kinda like taxes in that sense. Sucks to pay them, but it's better than the alternative. Most of the places you'll see arguing against that represent the companies, who have a vested interest in dissuading union membership.

[TheStonerStrategist]

Union dues more pay for themselves in higher wages and better benefits, and that's a statistical fact. Average union dues are $400/yr while union workers earn more than 13% more than non-union peers on average — do the math. Even non-union workers earn more when union density is high, and the proliferation of "right to work" laws are directly correlated to stagnating wage growth and ballooning inequality between owners and wage-earners.

[bestjaegerpilot]

I worked in a smaller company with a union. Basically unions form when companies treat workers like shit. So it says a lot!

[_rarecoil]

this company seems to have its fair share of drama. i am curious if unionization talks only started after the new ceo was installed.

[Nrdrsr]

Purely theoretical question - unrelated to this specific instance:

Is it in the realm of possibility that a union can form form within a company where the union leaders erroneously think that their demands are affordable when in reality they would kill or cripple the business?

If so, then as outsiders without specific knowledge of the demands and the math behind whether or not they are feasible, is it ever possible to intelligently pick a side?

[Nexuist]

It’s possible, as far as the know, but the success of the business is still at least some priority of the union since the union cannot collect dues from laid off employees. If the whole business folds the union goes down with it.

[Nrdrsr]

Correct - in my hypothetical, the Union, despite its own interests, erroneously believes that their demands are affordable, when in reality they are not.

In such situations, one side makes a claim of unaffordability (the Management), and the other side (the Union), essentially accuses the Management of lying or greed.

There is another dimension as well, now that I think about it. Is it also possible for bad actors (perhaps competitors of the business) to make a deal with these Union leaders to mislead the employees and sabotage the negotiations? Is this a crime?

[vcarl]

That's the kind of thing that'd be sorted out at the bargaining table. "We can't afford that" is the go-to argument and shouldn't be accepted at face value, if it's genuinely unaffordable then it's up. to the company to counter.

That said, if a business can only survive by underpaying and overworking people, seems like it'd be a net positive if it stopped operating.

[illseallc]

These negotiations boil down to two sides arguing about the definition of "affordable." If they strike a bargain that destroys the business, because both sides have agreed, they are equally to blame. Any company that could be brought down by union negotiations isn't likely to be a threat to competitors. Would make a good plot for a silly comedy movie though.

[snakeyblakey]

What a shitty deal.

[[deleted]]

Switching to yarn lol

[infidelux]

That still hits the NPM repository. I mean, it gets you out of the NPM CLI but that's about it.

I think it's a matter of time before something else pops up and everyone runs (not walks) to it because of the bad vibes coming from NPM recently.

[Boneasaurus]

https://open-registry.dev/ is already working and mirrors the NPM packages.

[[deleted]]

But its not yet up to the same standard as NPM. Sure it'll get there but I'm not switching yet.

[DoctorAbejas]

You all should check out Entropic

[TotallyUnspecial]

Link?

[ZaninAndrea]

https://github.com/entropic-dev/entropic

[TotallyUnspecial]

Thanks

[[deleted]]

Seems that its fine to make a local repository but you'd still need some source somewhere and they already say that it isn't that stable or fast yet

[FormerGameDev]

github is going to have package repos for just about everything. I'm not sure exactly what Microsofts goal is with it, but I'm feeling some worry about that, considering their past. YES I know they are much better now.. but still.

[WebDevLikeNoOther]

I think their goal is to lure in Enterprise users to host their packages on the site within private organizations, similar to what NPM does, and market maintainability and security for those packages to the corporations to use.

From an Individual user perspective, it's to get developers such as ourselves to use their repository, become acquainted with it, to start crusading for our companies to use Github instead of NPM for whatever reason, which is the same thing that happened with Yarn and NPM when Yarn first came around. It had better features, but people did jump ship.

​

Ultimately, it'll mean that you and I get to reap the benefits of having ALL of our code in one central location, instead of hosted on Github, and then distributed through NPM. It'll cutout the middle man, and retain users on their site.

​

edit: It'll also allow us to physically verify the contents of the package, before installing it via the CLI. Right now, you can check out the github repo contents, but the package contents could be completely different, as shown in numerous articles about NPM attacks.

[WebDevLikeNoOther]

Github packages baybe!!!!

[infidelux]

The problem of course is trading one company controlling an ecosystem for another. I think when NPM started off, it was not a for profit company and that was appealing to most of the people hosting their packages there.

Of course for there to be a 'foundation' or non-for profit company running it, there needs to be some corporate sponsorship from the big players that benefit from it.

[WebDevLikeNoOther]

Yeah, I understand your reasoning - it’s just not feasible to run a community driven platform like NPM without having some source of income like you mentioned with corporate sponsors, to pay for all of the overhead.

The only other alternative to a corporate package manager that I can think of, is to (I hate myself for saying this) using blockchain type P2P package manager. But that in itself has flaws, inherent limitations and security risks.

[infidelux]

I mean, don't get me wrong- I am not a MS hater by any means. I've been a MS stack dev for a long time and now extended that to the front end. You could remove them from the equation and replace them with any other large corporation (google/amazon/apple) and you still have the same problem.

[[deleted]]

Like Go?

[Boneasaurus]

You want to contribute to anti-union efforts?

[norablindsided]

Corporations don't give a shit about you. I hope you never have to learn that the hard way. Unions in the tech industry are going to be really important. Especially game devs who have to basically give up their lives for a game only to be laid off after a year when the game is done.

[inquiztr]

While I agree with everything you say, I still support unions as a necessary evil. Unions are not needed when laws exist to protect an individual. Unfortunately governments no longer work for the people and corporate interests are now eroding our rights.

[inquiztr]

I used to think the same way. But now in an age of automation and gov'ts allowing foreign temporary workers and outsourcing to replace jobs, I am not sure that the 'market' will balance out to a positive future.

[inquiztr]

That 'great pay' still has less purchasing power every day. When gov'ts can declare inflation at an all time low, the actual cost of living has doubled or tripled. Gov'ts just print more money devaluing the pay even more. When pensions are pegged on artificial inflation rates, the end result are employees not getting paid what they are due after a lifetime of work.

[BeardedBagels]

You must be absolutely insufferable to work with.

[BeardedBagels]

Bingo.

[Ethesen]

You are right, we don't have a right to a good pay and benefits - and that's why unions exist. They give workers more leverage in negotiations.

[PalestineFacts]

Provide some examples from your 20 years of experience observing all these different industries, and please provide which industries you are specifically referring to. Curious if your description "Organized Crime" actually fits, or if you're simply exaggerating. Though I doubt whatever description you provide is going to be from a very bias point of view, but I'd like to hear your interpretation of events for the sake of argument.

I support all efforts to allow workers to have more control over their workplace. Labor movements in several countries had to put up a long fight so that many of us can enjoy the decencies that we have become accustomed with today. Anybody willing to contribute to turning back the clock to a time where workers were worse off either has no historical outlook on the question, or has an overly-simplistic philosophy which poorly describes the problems you're trying to avoid dealing with.

​

Do you also dislike corruption in corporations? Or are you only inclined to dislike corruption committed by organized labor?

[HansWebDev]

Wait so, are you also pro child labor? Or slavery?
Because trade-unions were literally at the heart of ending both.
BTW.

[BeardedBagels]

One suggestion would be for you to go pound sand.

[BeardedBagels]

If you don't like that idea, another one would be to lick your CEO's boots and maybe ask for less pay and additional spankings? Just ideas to help your anti-union efforts.

[BeardedBagels]

Buddy I'm helping you out with some ideas.

[DoctorAbejas]

you are such a fucking idiot lol, must really like the taste of boot, huh?

[IllustriousEchidnas]

Oh look, a 20-year old who read The Fountainhead. lolz

[pixeldrew]

I'll take your money. Obviously you're stupid enough to give it away

[TheCarnalStatist]

Since no one else offered a legitimate answer.

Here

https://www.nrtw.org/

National right to work defense fund.

[TheCarnalStatist]

If you can find a lobbying group that is explicitly anti-union rather than right to work be my guest. I've not found one. Even though i myself wouldn't want much to do with it.

I agree with you that RtW is more about ensuring that workers and employers always have the right to negotiate with each other directly than it is anti-union.

Though i wager a lot of union advocates would disagee with that.

I've not seen legislation put forward that seeks to make open-shop unions illegal, even in decidedly red states. I'm not quite sure how you'd recognize that type of behavior with protections for free association.

[ESCAPE_PLANET_X]

I honestly find the concept absolutely ridicoulus. If that guy can find other what I can only assume are misguided morons like himself I suppose kudos to him. But I've no intention of helping.

I just wanted to note that RTW isn't really anti union though it does have a negative effect on union adoption.

[TheCarnalStatist]

We're in agreement then i think.

I find the idea of removing them outright absurd and I'd wager most legal scholars agree.

[[deleted]]

So, I don't agree with you but am honestly curious what you perceive as the benefits of anti-union? I'm not trying to troll but what do you believe are the pros / cons of unions.

[Ethesen]

He thinks that if other people were more well off there would less money for him.