301–310 of 675 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
“Incredibly non-diverse”? No. They are in a better position than most https://www.nytco.com/2023-new-york-times-diversity-and-incl... The my don’t complain about tech being non-diverse, they report that it is non-diverse - which is true.
60% white is much whiter than a tech company
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The word "exploit" has no meaning at all if you can stretch it so far as to cover NYC tech employees.
Absolute hogwash. The existence of people being exploited more does not mean that people being exploited less are not being exploited. Like, yes, these workers are probably in better conditions than many global workers. But that doesn't mean the NYT isn't exploiting them. Also, consider showing some solidarity -- these people are workers, and have more in common with other workers than they have different. Support th…
What harsh working conditions are they working under that makes their situation so untenable at NYT but aren't willing to go looking for better conditions elsewhere?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> more than two years of bargaining How is this a refusal to negotiate?
Saying "no" for two years is not a negotiation.
What does the other side offer? If you want something from the other side, you better have something to offer which the other side wants:
"Give me a million USD, and I will smile!" - "No."
"Give me a million USD, and I will smile!" - "No."
"Give me a million USD, and I will smile!" - "No."
"Give me a million USD, and I will smile!" - "No."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the uncomfortable question for many here is, why should the SWE at Google get paid any more than the SWE at the NY Times?
That's not an uncomfortable question at all. SWE (and all employees) should be paid to the point that the owners of their company, while well-rewarded, are not sucking up a large percentage of global wealth personally...and that's the less adventurous answer.
It is funny here how all the people are pro-union don't start their own companies to compete with the ones that exploit people and offer employees all the perks they ever dreamed of.
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.
The word "exploit" has no meaning at all if you can stretch it so far as to cover NYC tech employees.
You can always (in a country like the US) find a group somewhere so much worse off that you can use them to paint US workers as greedy or spoiled.
The connection of these facts to exploitation is tenuous in this context, but it does make for good rhetoric.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Saying "no" for two years is not a negotiation.
> Saying "no" for two years is not a negotiation. What does the other side offer? If you want something from the other side, you better have something to offer which the other side wants: "Give me a million USD, and I will smile!" - "No." "Give me a million USD, and I will smile!" - "No." "Give me a million USD, and I will smile!" - "No." "Give me a million USD, and I will smile!" - "No."
"Give me a million USD, and I will smile!" - "No. That's unreasonable, I'll give you 100,000, and you'll dance each time you see me.".
"Make it 300,000,and I'll fake that I like you." ...etc
Negotiating goes both ways.
It should tell you something that 95% of the union voted to strike. I found more information from them here: https://www.nyguild.org/post/new-york-times-tech-guild-votes... I wonder how other news outlets will cover this, if at all. They’re probably afraid others will get the same idea.
Isn’t it a little ironic that NY Times, and most east coast media, is very anti big tech and pro union while their own employees are protesting because of low wages? Who are they to judge how big tech treats their employees when they pay their own so poorly?