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

241–250 of 675 posts

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

#241

Post by smoores »

taeric wrote: post #133
Manuel_D wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It looks like this is the union's platform: https://nytimesguild.org/contract-campaign/

Thanks for the link. Hate that a lot of their demands seem to be to leverage things they want over positions not covered by their guild. Is that actually a common thing that I just didn't know? I'd not expect a union to impact interviewing practices for all entry-level jobs somewhere.

I’m not sure exactly what you mean, but most non-managerial employees at the Times are now unionized. It is no one’s goal to improve the labor standards of the union members at the expense of non-union employees. It is nearly impossible to obtain contract language covering anything other than workplace and employment conditions for union members, as the company isn’t legally required to negotiate over any other topics, which is why you’re seeing reference to requests “for members”. That said, it is very often the case that wins for unionized employees benefit non-union workers as well, because it’s almost always not worth the administrative overhead for the company to have multiple separate policies for similar jobs.

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

#242

Post by ImJamal »

consteval wrote: post #199
ImJamal wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many of the support staff are in the union? The union is for the tech workers.

Right, to deliver their product over a tech channel to their many millions of customers. No, that's not easy. Yes, that's necessarily complex. You and your buddies can build a crossword or whatever the hell in a weekend. You can't deliver is to 100 million people tomorrow, while also maintaining one of the US' largest newpapers online.

I asked how many of the support staff are in the tech union. Did you reply to the wrong person?

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

#243

Post by shepherdjerred »

rrrrrrrrrrrryan wrote: post #232
strict9 wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 defin…

There are still plenty of great high-paying jobs, they are just more competitive.

If you are a good engineer you won't have a problem aside from having to play the numbers game a bit more. There are still new grads being hired but it's definitely not as easy as it was.

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

#244

Post by shepherdjerred »

mattdotc wrote: post #174
dwaltrip wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

[flagged]

What? The commenter approached this just fine. They didn't state anything as fact and asked for others to weigh in. This is completely reasonable in a discussion.

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

#245

Post by rightbyte »

shepherdjerred wrote: post #243
rrrrrrrrrrrryan wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 defin…

There are still plenty of great high-paying jobs, they are just more competitive. If you are a good engineer you won't have a problem aside from having to play the numbers game a bit more. There are still new grads being hired but it's definitely not as easy as it was.

> If you are a good engineer you won't have a problem

If companies on average knew who the 'good engineers' were, they wouldn't be laid off in the first place. (Unless the layoffs are really big).

The recruitment pipe is so convoluted nowadays that connections and recommendations are way more important than they used to be. Skills not so much.

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

#246

Post by robertlagrant »

brianwawok wrote: post #179
aleph_minus_one wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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

Presumably striking isn't a great sign of motivation already. If you think you're so unimpactful that your job is at risk, you probably aren't very motivated.

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

#247

Post by robertlagrant »

paxys wrote: post #198
aleph_minus_one wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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".

> the union should attempt to make an agreement They are literally striking because the company is refusing to negotiate with them.

> more than two years of bargaining

How is this a refusal to negotiate?

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

#248

Post by tomcam »

mattdotc wrote: post #174
dwaltrip wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

[flagged]

Might want to reread https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and especially this section: In Comments

    Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes.

    Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive.

    When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. "That is idiotic; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3."

    Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community.

    Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.

    Eschew flamebait. Avoid generic tangents. Omit internet tropes.

    Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something.

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

#249

Post by f6v »

rrrrrrrrrrrryan wrote: post #232
strict9 wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 defin…

I’ve been hearing the complete opposite on EU CS jobs Reddit. People say it’s impossible to get hired with no experience and just hard for seniors.

There’s so much of reporting and selection bias though.

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

#250

Post by dotancohen »

f6v wrote: post #249
rrrrrrrrrrrryan wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 defin…

I’ve been hearing the complete opposite on EU CS jobs Reddit. People say it’s impossible to get hired with no experience and just hard for seniors. There’s so much of reporting and selection bias though.

The juniors say that juniors are most affected. The experienced developers and engineers say that it is the experienced developers and engineers most affected.

Everybody has their perspective.

Post reply on HN