Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Wikipedia Workers to Seek Union Recognition

cwu.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 300 posts

Re: Wikipedia Workers to Seek Union Recognition

#151

Post by tovej »

mytailorisrich wrote: post #148
tovej wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those legal protections are easily eroded without unions. Just look at Finland. Here, the current government first made it illegal for unions to strike when the government takes action to weaken employment law, and then they significantly weakened employment law. The only protection left is collective bargaining agreements, which can still uphold some of the old legal protections through contract law. This was also o…

> Those legal protections are easily eroded without unions. That's very clearly not true based on the situation in Western Europe, in fact legal rights tend to keep increasing even when union membership is decreasing (e.g. UK, France). As said, jobs and society as a whole have evolved and noone can be elected in government by promising to take away important protections, what they can be elected on is promising to cu…

I just gave you an example. How can you say it is "very clearly not true".

You would have to somehow disprove the reality of what has already happened in order to make that statement

Re: Wikipedia Workers to Seek Union Recognition

#152

Post by tremon »

christkv wrote: post #119
chobeat wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Guess how those labor laws were achieved. Spoiler: unions. Same as weekends, 40-hour work week and so on. Strong unions win laws.

I don't dispute that unions were important and offer some sort of benefit. What I don't like is that most of the big unions in Europe receive a lot of governmental money and become lobbying groups for political parties. I would not consider them independent in any sense of the word.

But that's exactly what a union is: a lobbying group that strives for a better outcome on behalf of its members. "Independence" is not part of their job description. Why wouldn't they talk to politicians, or even publicly support the political parties that are more aligned with their goals? Or do you believe that is a privilege to be reserved only for the rich?

Re: Wikipedia Workers to Seek Union Recognition

#153

Post by kaonwarb »

Frieren wrote: post #56

There is no reason for any employee to not search for unionization. It is your right and it is in your best interest. Good for them.

Strong disagree that there is no other side of the question from the employee's perspective. Personally, I don't want to be collectively represented in my work by any group other than myself.

Re: Wikipedia Workers to Seek Union Recognition

#154

Post by bpt3 »

chobeat wrote: post #107
JdeBP wrote: post #90

This is the same press release from the union as at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48663861 , and the same discussion points apply as there, including the fact that the press release is conflating 'Wikipedia Workers' and 'British-based employees at the Wikimedia Foundation'. The two are not the same. This conflation appears to be the fault of the union. Certainly the people who write Wikipedia well know the dif…

There's a union of wikipedia editors being formed and they are in alliance with the US and UK Wikimedia union. More public statements will follow in the next weeks about this.

What are the legal protections for collectively bargaining as non-employees with a corporation, if any?

It seems like there wouldn't be (and shouldn't be) any.

Re: Wikipedia Workers to Seek Union Recognition

#155

Post by AnthonyMouse »

tovej wrote: post #137
mytailorisrich wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that unions played a big role in the past does not imply that they are as important now because of the changes in legal protection, types of jobs, and society.

Those legal protections are easily eroded without unions. Just look at Finland. Here, the current government first made it illegal for unions to strike when the government takes action to weaken employment law, and then they significantly weakened employment law. The only protection left is collective bargaining agreements, which can still uphold some of the old legal protections through contract law. This was also o…

> Unions are the only defense that workers have. If there are no unions, the employer can have their pick among desperate job seekers, and give them the lowest wage they can live on.

The major other defense is competition. If there were infinitely many workers then unions would be useless to begin with, because employers would just let them walk out and hire someone else.

Individuals can likewise use the fact that labor is finite to make employers offer more by credibly threatening to work somewhere else. This is trivially shown by all the people who make an above-median wage despite not being in a union.

You do, however, need competition for that, and in turn to not have laws that prop up incumbents and create barriers to entry to new companies (i.e. new prospective employers).

Re: Wikipedia Workers to Seek Union Recognition

#156

Post by AnthonyMouse »

shit_game wrote: post #130
logicchains wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Denying people agency and power in their negotiation by claiming they are "not as good as someone else" is antithetical to the struggle of labor - work deserves to be compensated fairly. Labor is not a homogenous block. A huge chunk of workers are lazy as fuck and only do the bare minimum; it's unfair for people who work hard that their compensation should be lowered just so the lazy ones can be paid more. And lower…

Any company is free to hire whoever it cares at its own discretion, and in most (49/50) US states fire them without cause; perhaps due diligence is required of companies that are unionized to ensure that they are investing wisely in the labor they pay for, rather than accepting that all labor must be paid less on the argument that maybe it is of poorer quality than desired. If you work in a unionized workplace and ha…

> If you work in a unionized workplace and have complaints about a coworkers capability, your complaints should first be heard by your union because your union is the arbiter of your labor force, as per the contract you sign with said union.

The question obviously being, what are you supposed to do if they fail to address it?

Suppose the union leadership brought in a bunch of their own incompetent cronies and is now making a hash of things, but you can't vote them out because those same cronies keep voting them in.

Re: Wikipedia Workers to Seek Union Recognition

#157

Post by arethuza »

bpt3 wrote: post #154
chobeat wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a union of wikipedia editors being formed and they are in alliance with the US and UK Wikimedia union. More public statements will follow in the next weeks about this.

What are the legal protections for collectively bargaining as non-employees with a corporation, if any? It seems like there wouldn't be (and shouldn't be) any.

Different legal systems have options for groups organizing to do a join litigation e.g. England and Wales have Group Litigation Orders.

I'm not a lawyer and not in England or Wales! ;-)

Re: Wikipedia Workers to Seek Union Recognition

#158

Post by bpt3 »

iso1631 wrote: post #87
Telaneo wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What have the Romans ever done for us?

My union does very little for me directly. Neither does my house or car insurance. I've never needed either. Indirectly though my union does do stuff I'm sure Alec Baldwin was happy he was a member of a union to represent him.

> I'm sure Alec Baldwin was happy he was a member of a union to represent him.

Why is it that so many union supporters point to entities like SAG and professional athlete unions in the US when advocating for unions, when they are a massive exception to the norm?

I would join a union like SAG. I have zero interest in being forced to make contributions to a political organization who has a passing interest in my well-being at best and is structured to benefit below-average workers.

Re: Wikipedia Workers to Seek Union Recognition

#159

Post by bpt3 »

dofm wrote: post #122
changoplatanero wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What’s in the collective best interest may not match with what’s in the individual best interest. Perhaps unions are more likely to be in the self interest of the below average employees, the ones with no negotiating power. The best school teachers are almost certainly being held back by their unions and the worst ones are getting a free pass. When I worked at a unionized place I was blocked from an opportunity my em…

You can fall ill or need working accommodations regardless of whether you are above or below average.

And you can more easily take care of those needs yourself if you aren't required to subsidize your below average colleagues.

Re: Wikipedia Workers to Seek Union Recognition

#160

Post by sandworm101 »

francisdavey wrote: post #139
throw93949444 wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is like 50 page agreement, you even have to give up your copyright rights! The only way to do it legally in my country, is to hire editor as an employee!!! (Contractors can not legally give up copyright to their work) https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Policy:Terms_of_Use

You license your contributions under an open licence. You don't give up your copyright. There would be no other sensible way to operate a collaborative encyclopedia without a license of this kind. I (lawyer) have never encountered a jurisdiction where a contractor could not license their work under the contract with their employer (the person contracting them).

There are some non-divestable rights out there. Canada (and others) have a copyright concept of moral rights that cannot be given away by contract or, in other words, nobody can ever force someone to give them away. An artist/creator can decide to not exercise them but the artist/creator retains them regardless of contract language.

>> Unlike other IP rights, moral rights cannot be sold or given away. Even in the case of a sale, an author retains their moral rights in the work, unless they choose to waive these rights.

https://ised-isde.canada.ca/site/canadian-intellectual-prope...

I was thinking about this as they were covering up murals and stadium names for the world cup. Canada doesnt really do that, but canadian stadiums are not generally named after tech companies (ie BC Place got to keep its name).

Post reply on HN