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

New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 1001 posts

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#181

Post by hamandcheese »

chis wrote: post #176
9dev wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a foreigner it’s so alien to me that such a provision isn’t mandated by law anyway, and that there isn’t broad support in the population to restrict employers from firing at will… wild.

An an American it's hard for me to imagine how companies could ever work with universal protections from firing at will. What if you're running a painting business, and there's a downturn in construction. Do you just have to pay people to do nothing, since they haven't done anything wrong and aren't allowed to be fired? Or what if a large company needs to make a strategic pivot and fire some employees to hire others…

In all those cases, it sounds like the company would actually suffer the consequences of their prior mismanagement (compared to today where mostly just employees suffer from bad management decisions).

Yes, that means some companies might go under when they could have saved themselves by mass layoffs. I'd be okay with that trade.

Yes, that means growth might slow down to more reasonable levels. I'd be okay with that trade. Europe isn't booming economically like the US, but if you've ever traveled there, their quality of life seems perfectly fine, and costs are much lower.

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#182

Post by gotoeleven »

9dev wrote: post #154
bee_rider wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Negotiations between it and the Times hit logjams over things like a “just cause” provision that prevents the company from firing workers unless it’s for something like misconduct, as well as pay increases, pay equity, and return-to-office policies, reports the Times. https://www.theverge.com/2024/11/4/24287600/new-york-times-t... I dunno. It is a negotiation between the union and the company. They might not have p…

As a foreigner it’s so alien to me that such a provision isn’t mandated by law anyway, and that there isn’t broad support in the population to restrict employers from firing at will… wild.

Perhaps there is a link between at will employment and competitive, thriving businesses.

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#183

Post by pennomi »

chis wrote: post #176
9dev wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a foreigner it’s so alien to me that such a provision isn’t mandated by law anyway, and that there isn’t broad support in the population to restrict employers from firing at will… wild.

An an American it's hard for me to imagine how companies could ever work with universal protections from firing at will. What if you're running a painting business, and there's a downturn in construction. Do you just have to pay people to do nothing, since they haven't done anything wrong and aren't allowed to be fired? Or what if a large company needs to make a strategic pivot and fire some employees to hire others…

There are usually provisions for firing people due to financial hardship or having too few contracts. The employer must declare the reason, but if it’s found out that they lied, there is an avenue for the worker to get compensated.

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#184

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

insane_dreamer wrote: post #161

Have devs at any of the large tech companies ever tried to unionize? If not, why not?

Many big tech companies have a software union, but despite substantial efforts invested from CWA none have gotten close to majority support across a whole company. Microsoft has some majority unions in specific segments of their gaming org.

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#185

Post by kayo_20211030 »

gruez wrote: post #146
stego-tech wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I see people critique those numbers as being “too high”, or demands for additional compensation “unreasonable”, I can’t help but think those people don’t understand that $100k is very much the new $45k of the 2000s, and has much less purchasing power than the latter did at the time. Truth be told, for the present cost of living in the Northeast in general, you’re looking at a family income of $300k to be “comfor…

>I can’t help but think those people don’t understand that $100k is very much the new $45k of the 2000s, and has much less purchasing power than the latter did at the time. False. $45k in 2005 is only $73k today, when adjusted for inflation[1]. Even if you use the most generous interpretation of "2000s" to mean 2000, that's only $82k. [1] https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/

There's more in play here than math. An interesting idea is the concept of a "Vibecession", coined by Kyla Scanlon.

It's more a focus on how people "feel" about their situation than it is math. It's resonant to me.

https://kyla.substack.com/p/the-vibecession-the-self-fulfill...

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#186

Post by henrikgs »

chis wrote: post #176
9dev wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a foreigner it’s so alien to me that such a provision isn’t mandated by law anyway, and that there isn’t broad support in the population to restrict employers from firing at will… wild.

An an American it's hard for me to imagine how companies could ever work with universal protections from firing at will. What if you're running a painting business, and there's a downturn in construction. Do you just have to pay people to do nothing, since they haven't done anything wrong and aren't allowed to be fired? Or what if a large company needs to make a strategic pivot and fire some employees to hire others…

That's not how it works at all. Of course you can fire someone with proper cause, you just can't fire someone __at will__. Lack of demand for the position is proper cause. If you don't need staff you can fire them, but you cannot fire someone and hire someone else in the same position.

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#187

Post by tsunamifury »

greentxt wrote: post #131
cowpig wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's put those numbers in perspective: $100k is about $72k after tax[0]. Suppose I want to support a family in NYC. Average cost of living is about $9,000/mo for a family of four[1]. That's $108,000 per year. Or about $36,000 above what I would need to support an average 2-kid family, living paycheck-to-paycheck. So if I want to be able to support a family, 100k is not even close to enough. edit: forgot to add the s…

[flagged]

This has to be the most out of touch comment I have read ever here.

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#189

Post by fakedang »

thinkingtoilet wrote: post #147
impish9208 wrote: post #80

From the WSJ’s reporting on this: > Most employees in the tech union receive pay of more than $100,000, and average compensation, including bonus and restricted stock units, is $190,000, according to a Times spokeswoman. That figure is an average of $40,000 more than members of the Times’s journalist union, she said. > Times leaders have also bristled at the nature of some of the guild’s requests. The union previousl…

People will laugh at it, but pet bereavement should absolutely be a thing. The saddest I've ever been in my life was when my dog died. Perhaps seven days is a bit much, but when you go to the bargaining table you don't start with what you want, you start past that point then negotiate down.

[flagged]

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#190

Post by potato3732842 »

bee_rider wrote: post #137
SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #110

This strike seems very poorly messaged. As far as I can tell, the union hasn't given any public explanation of what specific demands management won't meet. The union website doesn't even mention that they're on strike!

> Negotiations between it and the Times hit logjams over things like a “just cause” provision that prevents the company from firing workers unless it’s for something like misconduct, as well as pay increases, pay equity, and return-to-office policies, reports the Times. https://www.theverge.com/2024/11/4/24287600/new-york-times-t... I dunno. It is a negotiation between the union and the company. They might not have p…

> They might not have prepared much marketing material because they aren’t really selling anything to those of us in the general public, right?

NYT isn't a highly regulated interstate employer like Boeing or the rail industry or the dockworkers so it's dispute with the union isn't a de-facto matter of national politics like those strikes were so appealing to the public to have a particular opinion on the matter is not of as much use therefore neither side of this dispute has invested heavily in it.

Post reply on HN