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

New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 675 posts

Re: New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike

#171

Post by relaxing »

thegrim33 wrote: post #112
mint2 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regardless of what infographic makers declare, the NYT newsroom is not “left” leaning. Their coverage is much more complicated than left vs right, but one theme is they don’t question the loudest narratives, and they hold grudges when they perceive someone to not give them enough access. The right tends to be louder and more uniform and persistent in messaging, so that coloring often gets unconsciously added to artic…

Well here's a challenge for you, we can easily put your viewpoint to the test: Go on the NYT website right now and find me a single article currently on the front page that's negative about leftist policies or politicians, or a single article that's positive about rightist policies or politicians. I bet you can't find any. Repeat this experiment, any minute, any hour, any day, any year, for the last 10 years, and you…

Ross Douthat is still employed so your assertion falls flat on its face.

Aside from that, right now I see an item claiming Harris has flip-flopped on progressive policies.

Re: New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike

#172

Post by emeril »

WaitWaitWha wrote: post #166

I am trying to justify 622 Tech workers with the 700mm visits noted. Can someone explain it to me? 622 * $124,584 [0] * 1.25 = $96,864,060/year Their CPM and CPC would need to be seriously fine tuned to sustain this. $5 per 1,000 visitors (CPM): they would need 19.37 billion ad impressions. Similar problem when calculating CPC with $0.10 to $2 range. I cannot see how they are still in business. [0] https://www.robert…

it's been a while since I worked in adtech so unsure best where to source/verify those impressions but much of NYT views are by paid subscribers so I'd imagine that funds at least a good chunk of those workers salaries?

further, I also don't know much of of NYT's tech but it doesn't seem especially difficult or cutting edge so 622 tech workers does seem a bit bloated though I guess they might need a little staff for IT in various locations worldwide so that adds up maybe?

Re: New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike

#173

Post by hungie »

adw wrote: post #66
hungie wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The NYT is not a left wing organization. It aligns, mostly, with a centrist Democrat politically. That position puts it pretty center right on the global scale. A left wing paper would typically be pretty anti capitalist, anti imperial, etc. which the NYT is definitely not. This is a global forum, it's important to remember that while the democrats in the US are called "the left" there, they really really are not a l…

"Center right" is if anything underselling it. The NYT is to the right of, for example, the Financial Times.

And yet, downvotes. I feel like it's pretty objective that NYT isn't leftist in any meaningful way.

Re: New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike

#174

Post by mattdotc »

dwaltrip wrote: post #169
WaitWaitWha wrote: post #166

I am trying to justify 622 Tech workers with the 700mm visits noted. Can someone explain it to me? 622 * $124,584 [0] * 1.25 = $96,864,060/year Their CPM and CPC would need to be seriously fine tuned to sustain this. $5 per 1,000 visitors (CPM): they would need 19.37 billion ad impressions. Similar problem when calculating CPC with $0.10 to $2 range. I cannot see how they are still in business. [0] https://www.robert…

Don’t forget to include subscription revenue, also their extra offerings of games, cooking, etc

[flagged]

Re: New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike

#175

Post by hungie »

shagie wrote: post #129
hungie wrote: post #31

Good for them. More workers need to be understanding just how much they are being exploited by their leadership and demand a more equitable piece of the pie.

What would be more equitable? https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=New+York+Times&assumpti... puts the revenue per employee at $422,656. They've got 5900 employees and https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/07/business/media/new-york-t... says a quarterly profit of $104.7 million. $400M / 5900 gives about $68,000 profit per employee. So, what's reasonable? Would giving everyone a $65k pay raise and zeroing out the profit fo…

If you want the Union's opinion, their strike demands are the place to look.

If you want my opinion, what you've described would be a start. Or at least the workers there should be parties to a decision on whether that's the right decision. I'd consider lowering executive compensation as well. But there's many ways to achieve a balance within an organization that benefits the product and the workers.

Re: New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike

#176

Post by mandmandam »

tptacek wrote: post #158
simonw wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surely playing a crossword game is only "crossing the picket line" if the workers on strike have asked you not to play that crossword / called for a more general boycott?

I think there's a deeper and more important subtlety here: there's a sort of moral obligation not to break a strike, but except in some specific circumstances, there really isn't an obligation to support a boycott, any more than there's an obligation to put a pro-labor bumper sticker on your car. Breaking a streak and ignoring a boycott are not equally weighted. (My kid brother is a labor person, so really I'm just v…

> "a labor person"

... Are we supposed to know what that means?

The way you're using it, it sounds like a pejorative... Which puts something of a spin on your particular pedantry here.

> there really isn't an obligation to support a boycott

I think the Irish - who invented the term - would disagree with you on that point.

Not every boycott is worth supporting, sure. But if a boycott is worth supporting (say, divesting from genocide supporters) then yes there's a bit of an obligation there.

Re: New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike

#177

Post by mattdotc »

delichon wrote: post #5

How does one refrain from crossing the virtual picket line of such a strike? Is it to not do business with any company with this union's workers, for the duration?

Watch for public statements from the union. A striking unit will generally inform the general public if they are looking for any show of support. No need to assume that a boycott is desired!

Re: New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike

#178

Post by Manuel_D »

yieldcrv wrote: post #159
Manuel_D wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to Google, the NY Times has a profit margin of 6-10% in most quarters. They're not exactly rolling in cash. Not to mention, there's a bunch of other teams at the NY Times that presumably want raises too. What's the justification for giving a raise to developers, but not to the writers that produce the company's main product?

share compensation doesn’t use cash

It does use cash unless the company dilutes the stock by adding more shares. And if they dilute stock, they're effectively taking money from the existing shareholders. There's no free lunch.

Re: New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike

#179

Post by brianwawok »

aleph_minus_one wrote: post #168
paxys wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In fact I'd wager that one of the reasons for the urgency on the workers' part is to lock up contracts before the election in order to prevent mass layoffs right after.

> urgency on the workers' part is to lock up contracts before the election in order to prevent mass layoffs right after. If workers fear mass layoffs, going on strike is a bad idea. Instead, in such a situation the union should attempt to make an agreement with the employer of the kind "no salary increase (as it would be appropriate in consideration of the inflation), but job security for the next years".

Which is a great way to have a company full of people who can’t be fired with no motivation, harming the parent organization

Re: New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike

#180

Post by Manuel_D »

WaitWaitWha wrote: post #166

I am trying to justify 622 Tech workers with the 700mm visits noted. Can someone explain it to me? 622 * $124,584 [0] * 1.25 = $96,864,060/year Their CPM and CPC would need to be seriously fine tuned to sustain this. $5 per 1,000 visitors (CPM): they would need 19.37 billion ad impressions. Similar problem when calculating CPC with $0.10 to $2 range. I cannot see how they are still in business. [0] https://www.robert…

The NY Times is mostly subscription funded now:

> Subscription revenue in the quarter grew 7.3 percent, to $439.3 million, compared with the previous year. Total advertising revenue was up 1.2 percent, at $119.2 million.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/07/business/media/new-york-t....

Post reply on HN