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

221–230 of 675 posts

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

#221

Post by sudosysgen »

dgfitz wrote: post #211
consteval wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does that make a difference or are y'all just constantly moving goalposts to fuel the narrative that media is inherently left-leaning? Because it's really not - especially not in the US. Go look through their articles. How many serve corporate interests? How many are fundamentally ultra-capitalists? You guys act like these are commies. No, they're right-leaning, just not far right insane wackos (Fox News). You're rig…

> ...to fuel the narrative that media is inherently left-leaning? Right around this time 8 years ago, the election was over... in the media. Clinton won, trump didn't, in like September of 2016. Like, the world was collectively shocked. Because, according to the media, trump was cooked. How does that square?

A big part of why Clinton won in the media while her rivals didn't is because she was the least left-leaning Democrat president candidate since, well, Clinton. Clinton's' vast corporate support is because she would lean to the right of the average American on most economic issues and was business as usual, in vast opposition to her rival.

Compare for example media treatment of Sanders or even Warren when he opposed her and you can see that it's not her leftist tendencies that made her win in the media.

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

#222

Post by tptacek »

mandmandam wrote: post #176
tptacek wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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, divestin…

He's in a union and pays attention to this stuff. That's all it meant.

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

#223

Post by User23 »

oconnore wrote: post #32
addicted wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The guild, which was formed in 2022, has yet to secure a contract after more than two years of bargaining. This seems like a pretty reasonable reason to strike. Arguably it’s the most justifiable reason to strike.

[flagged]

Didn't you get an offer letter? I assume it stated the terms of your employment like the work expected, the consideration (compensation) to be provided, and, most likely, the at-will nature of the agreement.

In this case "secure a contract" means terms that are somehow perceived as more favorable than employment-at-will.

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

#224

Post by soerxpso »

ugh123 wrote: post #152
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.

[flagged]

> These are high paid tech workers in a high paid industry. How are they being exploited

Nail on the head. I'd be grateful to do their job for half of what they make (and I could probably do it just as well). There are thousands of highly qualified tech workers currently working as Starbucks baristas who feel the same way. I don't know exactly what the legal options NYT has to handle this are, but I imagine the union isn't in a strong place to negotiate beyond "it would be the most inconvenient time to replace us right now."

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

#225

Post by dgfitz »

sudosysgen wrote: post #221
dgfitz wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ...to fuel the narrative that media is inherently left-leaning? Right around this time 8 years ago, the election was over... in the media. Clinton won, trump didn't, in like September of 2016. Like, the world was collectively shocked. Because, according to the media, trump was cooked. How does that square?

A big part of why Clinton won in the media while her rivals didn't is because she was the least left-leaning Democrat president candidate since, well, Clinton. Clinton's' vast corporate support is because she would lean to the right of the average American on most economic issues and was business as usual, in vast opposition to her rival. Compare for example media treatment of Sanders or even Warren when he opposed h…

> Compare for example media treatment of Sanders or even Warren when he opposed her and you can see that it's not her leftist tendencies that made her win in the media.

Respectfully I don’t accept your premise here. You’re saying she was center of left? But still “left”, as it were? And you agree the media crowned her king months before the election?

So the media ordained her the winner. You do agree or you do not?

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

#226

Post by WaitWaitWha »

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

Ah, thanks. I was not aware of those.

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

#227

Post by strict9 »

ruraljuror wrote: post #216
strict9 wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely. This is the worst job market for tech workers in probably 20 years. Many employed in tech are hoping to keep their job, let alone bargain for higher wages and remote work. Hard to imagine this effort having as much leverage if it were to happen after the election.

> Absolutely. This is the worst job market for tech workers in probably 20 years. Any sources for this? Asking out of curiosity—not disagreement.

Nope, hence the word probably. 100% anecdotal.

Last recession was 2008 and job prospects for a software dev are much worse now compared to then. Go back further and it was dotcom bust a little more than 20 years ago.

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

#228

Post by mtalantikite »

ImJamal wrote: post #192
mtalantikite wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just a quick look, here's one that plays into the mainstream narrative that Hamas is hiding out in hospitals and schools and therefore it's understandable to bomb them: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/10/world/middleeast/airstrik...

Was that on the front page? I just checked and couldn't find it there.

It was, but it's fallen off at this point. Now most of the front page and editorial is about the US presidential debate that is about to happen, the coverage of which looks like any other mainstream establishment news publication in the US.

Compare that to an actual leftist publication like The Nation, where the second most popular article is literally about the enduring legacy of Marx's Capital (lol): https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/wendy-brown-marx-c...

Or over at Jacobin where this is the top story: https://jacobin.com/2024/09/ruwa-romman-dnc-speech-palestine

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

#229

Post by sealeck »

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…

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/20/opinion/kamala-harris-dem...

This was on the front page a couple of weeks ago

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

#230

Post by paperplatter »

Clubber wrote: post #142
shagie wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Union negotiation isn't always about money, though it is usually part of it. It's also about working conditions and benefits. Also you can get a raise without "costing" anything extra in the expense column, such as fewer working hours for the same pay/benefits.

This is a distinction without difference.
Post reply on HN