Wikipedia Workers to Seek Union Recognition
1–10 of 300 posts
Re: Wikipedia Workers to Seek Union Recognition
#2The announcement says both
Wikipedia workers in Britain are setting a “global first” by becoming the first body of workers at the online encyclopaedia to seek union recognition.
and
Outside the United States, the United Kingdom is WMF’s largest employment location, and a substantial majority of its UK staff are union members.
Something is inconsistent here. Are they trying to unionize people who edit Wikipedia for free?
Re: Wikipedia Workers to Seek Union Recognition
#3The announcement says both Wikipedia workers in Britain are setting a “global first” by becoming the first body of workers at the online encyclopaedia to seek union recognition. and Outside the United States, the United Kingdom is WMF’s largest employment location, and a substantial majority of its UK staff are union members. Something is inconsistent here. Are they trying to unionize people who edit Wikipedia for fr…
I think it’s the WMF employees who are unionising, as in salaried employees.
Re: Wikipedia Workers to Seek Union Recognition
#4The announcement says both Wikipedia workers in Britain are setting a “global first” by becoming the first body of workers at the online encyclopaedia to seek union recognition. and Outside the United States, the United Kingdom is WMF’s largest employment location, and a substantial majority of its UK staff are union members. Something is inconsistent here. Are they trying to unionize people who edit Wikipedia for fr…
I read that as the majority of wikimedia employees in the uk have joined the union, but the union has yet to be recognized by the company with a collective agreement.
Re: Wikipedia Workers to Seek Union Recognition
#5Have the WMF done something bad that needs counterbalancing or are they just forming a union out of some sort of principle?
Re: Wikipedia Workers to Seek Union Recognition
#6Have the WMF done something bad that needs counterbalancing or are they just forming a union out of some sort of principle?
They recently laid off an internal team that was popular among workers and also fired one of the oldest employees for dubious reasons. Notably all of the people laid off or fired were union advocates, so this can be seen as a supercharged reaction to an effort to union bust (whether it was or not, it was certainly perceived that way).
Re: Wikipedia Workers to Seek Union Recognition
#7The announcement says both Wikipedia workers in Britain are setting a “global first” by becoming the first body of workers at the online encyclopaedia to seek union recognition. and Outside the United States, the United Kingdom is WMF’s largest employment location, and a substantial majority of its UK staff are union members. Something is inconsistent here. Are they trying to unionize people who edit Wikipedia for fr…
There are other lines in the post that, to me, provide clarity.
First is this, the second paragraph:
> British-based employees at the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) wrote a letter to management today (Wednesday 24thJune) requesting their right to be represented by the United Tech and Allied Workers (UTAW) section of the Communication Workers Union (CWU).
That makes it clear that this is regarding the "British-based employees at the Wikimedia Foundation". Yes, the headline does say "Wikipedia": I expect the CWU chose that because many more folks know what Wikipedia is, vs. the Wikimedia foundation.
Second is this:
> Over 1000 Wikimedia volunteers and community members have also signed petitions in support of the workers, who have networked globally under the banner of Wiki Workers United (WWU).
I view terms like "[wikipedia] editors" as terms of art: "Editor" in the Wikipedia context maps to the more-generic "volunteer" in the broader context, which is why the post is referring here to "volunteers and community members".
So, I don't see any inconsistency in the article, but I see how the current post title can make it confusing.
In my opinion, I think it would be appropriate for you to email the HN folks, to ask the title be changed to something like "Wikimedia Foundation Workers to Seek Union Recognition".
Re: Wikipedia Workers to Seek Union Recognition
#8Man, it's sad how far the wiki foundation has fallen.
For (literally) decades no one there would have even thought of forming a union! To get them to not only consider it, but actually go through the effort of actually doing it ... the foundation truly has shit the bed.
Re: Wikipedia Workers to Seek Union Recognition
#9Man, it's sad how far the wiki foundation has fallen. For (literally) decades no one there would have even thought of forming a union! To get them to not only consider it, but actually go through the effort of actually doing it ... the foundation truly has shit the bed.
Wikipedia has a lot of money, along with a valuable dataset (for AI); it was only a matter of time until rent-seeker(s) would come along and try to get it. As we saw with OpenAI, it is difficult to keep a non-profit dedicated to its public benefit mission when it has something of tantalizing value.
Re: Wikipedia Workers to Seek Union Recognition
#10The announcement says both Wikipedia workers in Britain are setting a “global first” by becoming the first body of workers at the online encyclopaedia to seek union recognition. and Outside the United States, the United Kingdom is WMF’s largest employment location, and a substantial majority of its UK staff are union members. Something is inconsistent here. Are they trying to unionize people who edit Wikipedia for fr…
You can be a member of a labor union without that union being recognized as your exclusive bargaining representative for a certain employer (or whatever unit).