It's a good objective, but it would take a lot to make it happen. It's significantly more challenging for tech workers to effectively unionize en masse for several reasons:

• Tech isn't monopsonistic, or even close to it; there isn't a single large employer... even the biggest tech companies employ only a relatively small fraction of the tech workforce. That means separate unionization efforts at thousands of big companies, not at one.

• Tech job functions are much more widely varied than "delivery driver"; job responsibilities differ greatly, complexity and education requirements differ greatly, workplace expectations differ greatly ... think of the difference between help desk, front end dev, network security engineering, data science and DBA. Collective bargaining is harder the more varied the needs of the collective are.

• Job mobility is really high in the tech sector ... in other words, tech employees (by and large) have access to many prospective employers (especially with the prevalence of remote work), and tech employers to a wide geographic pool of talent. That means if your San Francisco office seems on the path to unionization, you can shift work to your Chennai office.

• It also means that, when the working conditions at a tech company suck, a lot of tech workers can easily jump ship. It's hard to get a union going when your voters can easily quit and go work someplace nicer, rather than take the more difficult path of staying and trying to force your employer to improve.

Again, I think highly of unions and would really like to see more effective unionization efforts in tech -- I just want folks to go into it eyes wide open and intelligently, vs throwing up their hands and saying, "Why don't tech workers unionize?"