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

141–150 of 377 posts

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

#141

Post by inigyou »

jordanb wrote: post #114
cool_dude85 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not how it works. You need the signed cards to hold an election. Employers can, seeing a large majority publically willing to sign the cards before they have any solid protections, choose to forgo the election on the basis that a majority of employees were willing to sign. If the only reason WMF had to request a formal election was to allow secret ballot, they would not be hiring union busting law firms. The p…

It's not that the company can forgo the election. The company must allege that the cards are improper in order to activate the NLRB secret balloting process.

Has any company ever not alleged it?

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

#142

Post by amazingamazing »

acdha wrote: post #109
amazingamazing wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no evidence of unions performing better for digital services at all. Unions do make sense when physical labor and danger is involved because the demands of leadership contradict realities of human physiology like getting tired, leading to injury or death.

“No evidence” or “I haven’t looked for evidence”? Unions do more than just keeping people from dying in mining accidents — for example, I read this yesterday with what sure looks to be concrete benefits for the workers: https://www.propublicaguild.org/updates/propublica-guild-rat...

This isn’t impressive. 13% over 4 years? In any case this can’t be evaluated without knowing what was initially offered pre union and what they initially asked for.

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

#143

Post by akolbe »

inigyou wrote: post #128
ymolodtsov wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems it'd be far more reasonable to direct the excess funds into an endowment of sorts instead of spending it on other areas.

If they did that they'd already have a big enough endowment to fund all of Wikimedia for life.

Well, Wikimedia does have an Endowment, currently valued at $169 million. See Form 990:

https://wikimediaendowment.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/20...

This is in addition to assets of around $300 million held by the Wikimedia Foundation. Form 990:

https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikimedia_Foundat...

For expenses breakdown see the most recent audited accounts:

https://foundation.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Wiki...

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

#144

Post by inigyou »

CrimsonRain wrote: post #94
cyanydeez wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yes, yes, blame the victims. It's always the fault of the pedestrian for being in the road.

[flagged]

Capitalists have the same option. Don't like the union? Resign.

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

#145

Post by sokoloff »

unknownfuture wrote: post #132
ymolodtsov wrote: post #124

I understand why factory workers or store clerks might want a union but I'd never understand why tech workers should. I guess except the game developers but the most realistic threat vector for them is the studio shutting down, so a union wouldn't really help.

I can only assume you aren't paying attention to, and aren't personally experiencing, the impact of AI on the industry. Power has shifted dramatically in favour of the ownership class in the last couple of years. That's precisely what unions are meant to counterbalance.

What’s a union going to do if (doing a lot of work there) AI significantly reduces the demand for software engineers or tech workers generally?

If employers have the upper hand at the moment, the union contract will be more evenly distributed perhaps, but isn’t likely to be “better” overall.

That combines to have tech workers, who often have an exceptionalist view of themselves, to conclude that a union would cost them all the union overhead and prevent their exceptional talent from being properly rewarded.

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

#147

Post by cholantesh »

CrimsonRain wrote: post #94
cyanydeez wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yes, yes, blame the victims. It's always the fault of the pedestrian for being in the road.

[flagged]

So paid overtime, vacation, parental and sick leave, and 40 hour work weeks are, in fact, shameless excesses that have made office work worse?

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

#148

Post by shevy-java »

tgsovlerkhgsel wrote: post #25

Remember that this is what your money funds when you donate to it...

Some years ago, I think a french contributor pointed that out, aka asking why the wikimedia foundation wants so much money.

Now the picture is getting more clear - denying a union is clearly big brother billionaire thinking, e. g. lowering cost while maximizing abuse of workers/employees.

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

#149

Post by unknownfuture »

sokoloff wrote: post #145
unknownfuture wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can only assume you aren't paying attention to, and aren't personally experiencing, the impact of AI on the industry. Power has shifted dramatically in favour of the ownership class in the last couple of years. That's precisely what unions are meant to counterbalance.

What’s a union going to do if (doing a lot of work there) AI significantly reduces the demand for software engineers or tech workers generally? If employers have the upper hand at the moment, the union contract will be more evenly distributed perhaps, but isn’t likely to be “better” overall. That combines to have tech workers, who often have an exceptionalist view of themselves, to conclude that a union would cost th…

Look I'm not going to teach you about the entire history of labor relations and the role of unions.

But rest assured that this isn't some new, unique moment in history. The exact same questions could have been raised during the introduction of automation in literally any industry throughout modern history. And yes, unions have, through that same period, acted as a critical bulwark in protecting worker rights.

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

#150

Post by cool_dude85 »

inigyou wrote: post #141
jordanb wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not that the company can forgo the election. The company must allege that the cards are improper in order to activate the NLRB secret balloting process.

Has any company ever not alleged it?

Yes, but it's uncommon enough that doing so is called "voluntary recognition" of the union, acknowledging that the expected process is to file the cards and then do the NLRB election.
Post reply on HN