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

Wikimedia Foundation refuses union recognition, hires union-busting law firm

en.wikipedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 379 posts

Re: Wikimedia Foundation refuses union recognition, hires union-busting law firm

#12

Post by literalAardvark »

sam_lowry_ wrote: post #6
matchbok3 wrote: post #4

[flagged]

Can you provide your view of the events, then?

Read the post.

It's all fear mongering around a very balanced response from the WMF.

Could they engage in union-busting? Sure. Did they? No.

Re: Wikimedia Foundation refuses union recognition, hires union-busting law firm

#14

Post by cowsandmilk »

matchbok3 wrote: post #13
waisbrot wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article appeared to state both the facts and the assumptions being made off of them pretty clearly.

[flagged]

Both halves of the title are true statements.

Re: Wikimedia Foundation refuses union recognition, hires union-busting law firm

#16

Post by evolve2k »

hamper653 wrote: post #11

Can someone explain what "union recognition" means, concretely?

At the conceptual level, unionising is simply a group of workers gathering into a group and saying we want to negotiate as a group. Usually this is done by workers to improve conditions and to have a better say when they’ve been being ignored or worse, poorly treated.

Union recognition is then the company accepting that the union exists and then agreeing to meet and engage with it.

Not accepting it, is usually a crappy corporate move in an attempt to not have workers collaborating together.

Lots of research shows that generally places where unions exist have better work conditions and perform better over the long term.

The US has lower union involvement than in many countries.

Re: Wikimedia Foundation refuses union recognition, hires union-busting law firm

#20

Post by WarmWash »

cowsandmilk wrote: post #14
matchbok3 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Both halves of the title are true statements.

Unfortunately you can construct just about any narrative using true statements. Omission of facts is usually the damning trait of dishonesty.
Post reply on HN