Earlier quoted context omitted.
yes, yes, blame the victims. It's always the fault of the pedestrian for being in the road.
Go read why they want to unionize
Why don't you enlighten us.
Wikimedia Foundation refuses union recognition, hires union-busting law firm
91–100 of 377 posts
Re: Wikimedia Foundation refuses union recognition, hires union-busting law firm
#92Sigh. For me Wikipedia is synonymous with petty bickering and fiefdoms and politics. Why I am not surprised by this? It's like student unions only worse
Re: Wikimedia Foundation refuses union recognition, hires union-busting law firm
#93Good. Most tech unions are worthless and only accelerate outsourcing. Unions can be good though, like in construction where the work is inherently dangerous.
How are unions worthless? First they can prevent unsustainable growth. Wikipedia doesn't need to grow, second they prevent exploitation of the worker, why should some random person treat wikipedia as their personal lottery wikipedia wasn't a new, or good, or well executed idea. It's a basic service that helps collate information.
What's wrong with outsourcing? That's what we do with all our bad ideas. Need to blow leaves from one side of the street to the other? Get a Mexican to do it. This frees up people to have better ideas, like well written articles that don't have a hundred irrelevant links littering the page.
Re: Wikimedia Foundation refuses union recognition, hires union-busting law firm
#94Re: Wikimedia Foundation refuses union recognition, hires union-busting law firm
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
At the very minimum, the company acknowledges the union and negotiates with the union for working conditions for union members. It’s quite common that that also extends to negotiation on salary bands, and it’s also quite common the company then applies the same salary bands to non union employees also, rather than the norm in tech of individual negotiation. Many people think they’re in the group that is negotiating o…
> At the very minimum, the company acknowledges the union and negotiates with the union for working conditions for union members. By federal law, if a company has a union, the union must represent ALL non-management workers, even those who do not pay dues. This is obviously fucked up. But this has been union law at the NLRB for a long time. The fair response: a union should only legally be responsible for representin…
The problem there is that if it doesn't represent everyone, the company will simply give better conditions to nonmembers to pressure members to quit their membership. You do still have a way to change the union even if it's involuntarily representing you: just join it and then vote to disband it.
Re: Wikimedia Foundation refuses union recognition, hires union-busting law firm
#96Re: Wikimedia Foundation refuses union recognition, hires union-busting law firm
#97Good. Most tech unions are worthless and only accelerate outsourcing. Unions can be good though, like in construction where the work is inherently dangerous.
How are unions worthless? First they can prevent unsustainable growth. Wikipedia doesn't need to grow, second they prevent exploitation of the worker, why should some random person treat wikipedia as their personal lottery wikipedia wasn't a new, or good, or well executed idea. It's a basic service that helps collate information. What's wrong with outsourcing? That's what we do with all our bad ideas. Need to blow le…
This comment is pretty representative of why tech unions are worthless. Form a union to stop growth, and you pay your hard earned salary into such an organization with these goals?
Re: Wikimedia Foundation refuses union recognition, hires union-busting law firm
#98I'm hardly a fan of the WMF, but the headline is clickbait. The WMF has used a law firm called Jones Day for brand and trademark management for over a decade. The firm is one of the largest legal firms in the US and it also does union busting, but a) the WMF does not appear to have engaged them for that, and b) the relationship long predates the current kerfuffle.
> However, it eventually transpired that the Foundation has chosen to be represented by the law firm Littler Mendelson, which has an equally strong reputation for union busting.
Re: Wikimedia Foundation refuses union recognition, hires union-busting law firm
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is interesting how "enshittification" just happens because of scale.
Another word whose usefulness has been degraded to just mean “bad behavior by an organization”. With “enshittification”, Doctorow meant something specific, where a platform rises to popularity by serving its users, then betrays those users to its business partners to make more money, then finally betrays even those business partners to keep most of the value for themselves. Anyway I guess Doctorow brought this on him…
Doctorow approved the generic use. He said he never meant for "enshittification" to only ever refer to the platform lock-in pattern. It refers to any way that things get worse on purpose.
Re: Wikimedia Foundation refuses union recognition, hires union-busting law firm
#100[flagged]