Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
In that case, why is there such a thing as insider trading?
I doubt the SWEs have useful insider info at a company of this size.
New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike
231–240 of 675 posts
Re: New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike
#232Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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.
I think that's highly dependant how many years of experience you had. 2008 was definitely worse for inexperienced new grads than today, but today is probably worse for people in their peak earning years as companies are trimming the fat.
There are plenty of jobs out there right now, you just have to be willing to move and take a lower salary, which is much easier for young people than mid-career folks. The same definitely wasn't true in 2008.
Re: New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike
#233Earlier quoted context omitted.
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?
I am saying that the media was enamored with her because she represented a shift rightwards compared to her predecessors, and that her campaign successfully shifted the leftmost acceptable economic policies to be to the right of the electorate.
In that the media vastly prefered her over Trump, it was because she was pro-establishment and better aligned with corporate interests, not because she was economically to his left. The case of Warren and Sanders (where famously the media was happy to compare Sanders to Trump, reinforcing the idea that their opposition to Trump is not due to his right-wing economic policies) as well as the comparison to previous Democratic candidates is evidence I think is much more compelling than the assumption of leftwing/rightwing partisanship.
Re: New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike
#234Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those wages are absolutely not fair in the era of modern tech comp. But IMHO people should just find a different job, there are plenty available that pay better.
> But IMHO people should just find a different job, there are plenty available that pay better. Genuine question, why is that better? There are plenty of reasons why employees might be overall ok with the job and prefer to work out improvements in specific areas. The generally accepted implicit rationale of all of the accommodation needing to be done by the employees(including finding another job) is honestly puzzlin…
Unions are not effective at getting you to high comps. They will only get you to a middle of the road comp.
The seniority based structure is effectively a penalty on high achievers. Why should a union member be paid more just because they've worked there longer?
Big tech is a fantastic example of employment working without unions.
Re: New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike
#235Earlier quoted context omitted.
See also: the NYT's coverage of trans issues, which in recent years has tried to both-sides the topic in a way that gives fundamentalist hate groups equal oxygen as the fucking APA. No self-respecting leftist publication is handing the mic to Mumsnet users and conversion therapy advocates. (Contrast that to the New Yorker, which is hardly a commie rag and yet has been unambiguously progressive on that front, among ot…
[flagged]
"Gender critical" in what sense?
Re: New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike
#236> Kathy Zhang, a senior analytics manager with The Times and the guild's unit chair, said, "Management has really dragged its feet when it comes to bargaining," between the union formation and now. Maybe tangential, but I would have guessed people managers were not eligible to be a member of the union. Does anyone know how eligibility is determined?
Generally anyone below director level makes sense imho. The biggest advocate of pay rises and improvements to conditions is often the line level managers and those one step up from the line level managers. If this is a typical corporate job title this is a manager of line level managers. He probably has quarterly 1:1s or at least office hours supporting those at the lowest levels. It’s not like you become a line leve…
There's been a sucessful corporate ruse to make line level managers seem above line level workers and make line level works side against line level mamagers, while both sides are of the same labor class.
Re: New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike
#237Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are a host of other real expenses that need to be paid that "adjusted operating profit" doesn't account for. I'd be really surprised if total net profit was more than 50-65% of that.
Point taken. I'd still maintain that the stock buybacks are egregious and need to stop.
To emphasize: that point I can totally agree with. While I don't know the details of all the reasons this union is striking, I can certainly imagine lots of good, plausible reasons, and stock buybacks (if they are egregious) would be at the top of the list.
I was just pushing back against using "big tech comp packages" as some sort of baseline for what unions should be pushing for. It is completely unrealistic and people who say stuff like this hurt their own cause by not living in reality.
Re: New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike
#238Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
> Ross Douthat is still employed so your assertion falls flat on its face. I have no idea who that is. > Aside from that, right now I see an item claiming Harris has flip-flopped on progressive policies. I have no idea if this is true. Has she? Who is the authority on that?
Then go read the NYT front page and find out? He’s always there because he’s pure clickbait.
Whether it’s true or not is irrelevant. “Flip flop” is an insult in politics.
Re: New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike
#239> Kathy Zhang, a senior analytics manager with The Times and the guild's unit chair, said, "Management has really dragged its feet when it comes to bargaining," between the union formation and now. Maybe tangential, but I would have guessed people managers were not eligible to be a member of the union. Does anyone know how eligibility is determined?
Kathy isn’t a people manager, the Times just has confusing titles for its data folks. Product managers and project managers likewise often have “manager” in their titles without being people managers. No one with direct reports is allowed to be a member of the union!
Re: New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike
#240Earlier quoted context omitted.
Was that on the front page? I just checked and couldn't find it there.
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…
[flagged]