41–50 of 675 posts
[flagged]
The complexity of a massive org like the NYT is significantly non trivial.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think at least these days, usage of the term can include customers. For example, this from the University of Maine's Bureau of Labor Education: "Customers may refuse to cross a picket line and picketers have the right to ask customers to honor their picket but should not intimidate, block customer access, disparage a company’s product, or say anything that is untrue or casts the product in a false or misleading lig…
Not transacting with a business in solidarity with an ongoing strike is a boycott. People can boycott the NYT in support of the strike. But crossing a picket line is a much, much bigger deal than not participating in a boycott. If you skip the NYT Mini Crossword for a week to support the strikers, I respect that, but I'm going to keep pushing for that sweet 15s finish this week and I'm going to sleep fine doing it.
[flagged]
How does one refrain from crossing the virtual picket line of such a strike? Is it to not do business with any company with this union's workers, for the duration?
The answer is: don't make assumptions, listen to what the workers want. If they call for a boycott, boycott in support. If they say, "don't boycott", please don't encourage others to boycott.
Plenty in the media industry make money from engagement, and they might not want you to stop engaging! The writers strike, for instance, said keep watching but consider not producing content that builds off our content. Plenty of podcasts switched to other media for the duration.
As I understand it, the earliest they could actually strike would be 80 days from today, as per the Taft-Hartley act, putting the strike on November 29 (after the election). Something seems broken when a group is paid relatively fair wages ( https://www.levels.fyi/companies/the-new-york-times-company/... ), works 35 hours a week before overtime, and is talking about going on a strike. I don't think that fits with the…
If NYT has the money it makes sense to me for the employees to ask for higher pay. What else is the original purpose of unions than to give workers power to bargain with the company?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The NYT isn't left-wing in any context, other than one a segment of the US inherited from Glenn Beck some time in the 90s. It is an establishment paper, and energetically capitalist and interventionist. > They're probably anti-union in this case because they're on tenuous financial footing Why does your link say that their profit is up 60%(!) since 2020? ----- edit: tbh, I think people think the NYT is left-wing only…
They've suffered a massive contraction in revenue and already had to cut back hugely; you're ignoring that, and focusing on the bounce-back.
How does one refrain from crossing the virtual picket line of such a strike? Is it to not do business with any company with this union's workers, for the duration?
Continuing to do business with a company whose employees are striking isn't "crossing the picket line". Crossing the picket line means undermining a strike directly by supply labor when organized labor is using a labor embargo as leverage. To avoid crossing the NYT picket line, don't write for the NYT.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Can such a left wing cornerstone really afford to look anti-union inside their own house?" - The NYTimes isn't left wing and being anti-union is entirely within their wheelhouse. Now they won't come out and say "We don't like unions" all their issues will of course be why this specific union isn't a good idea at this specific time, but they'd never willingly accept a union unless they really don't think they have a…
The NYT has been liberal since I can remember; however, up until relatively recent decades, it was respected by conservatives as well as liberals. Now it reflects liberal and progressive povs.
I think leftists are basically in favor of unions in the US because leftists are generally in favor of labor protections, and unions are the best we can get inside the capitalist system. More extreme leftists might prefer some kind of socialist system, but that’s not on the table in America really.
Liberals are, of course, typically market oriented (that’s what liberal economics are). A liberal point of view would be “of course people have a basic right to associate with people of their choosing, negotiate contracts, and a union is just a vehicle for doing that.”
A union is about as much collectivism as a liberal can stomach, more of a stop-gap for a leftist.
[flagged]