I doubt it will disappear, but I certainly understand the desire to unionize. What might work better, would be a sort of guild. The aim would NOT be to engage in mob-style tactics like so many 20th-C American unions did. (That only works when there is a shortage of labor. The lobbyists probably tell their clients they've prevented that, but in reality it's because the internet.)

Rather, a guild that would work for our "profession" would be one that could refer coders with particular skills at particular levels, and then monitor the work closely enough to protect both coder and employer. Businesses with real work to do would pay a premium for that, but the guild would not take a cut directly. That way lies bureaucracy and tyranny, and besides all the Indian body shops already pretend to serve that market.

Rather, the guild would inspire those it helps to help it. It would certainly accept corporate donations, but since "decisions" would be kept to a minimum their influence would not be undue. Testing and education would be part of the mission (and that's how it could start), but so would basic community activities. Eventually a guild that offered health insurance could free its members from the grind of perpetual employment. (Someone whose kids will still be welcome at the doctor's if she takes a couple-month sabbatical is someone more in control of her career.) Those employers that don't need the assistance of the guild to get their software written wouldn't face any immoral pressure. However, if the guild becomes valued by many in the industry, auditors might be interested in why a particular company didn't use it.

Just a thought.

Creating a non-regulated market is not a bad thing. More programmers = more programming jobs.