New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike • Hacker News Board

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#431

Post by calibas » Mon, Nov 04, 2024, 5:27 PM UTC

Why would anybody trust a NYT article about internal drama at the NYT? Does HN not understand bias?

Compare the NYT article to other reporting, and you can see the difference. There's a few things the NYT forgot to mention, like the fact that these negotiations have been drawn out for 2 years now. Or this:

"Throughout the bargaining process, Times management has engaged in numerous labor law violations, including implementing return-to-office mandates without bargaining and attempting to intimidate members through interrogations about their strike intentions. The NewsGuild of NY has filed unfair labor practice charges against The Times on these tactics as well as numerous other violations of labor law."

https://nyguild.org/post/new-york-times-tech-guild-walks-off...

The NYT does include a quote blaming everything on the Tech Guild though: “We are disappointed that the Tech Guild leadership is attempting to jeopardize our journalistic mission at this critical time,”

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#432

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Nov 04, 2024, 5:27 PM UTC

cmptrnerd6 wrote: post #428

quandrum wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, I want management to develop a system to determine who is low-performing, document when those workers don't meet the standards of performance, and reference those documents when they fire someone. It's just asking for due process.

I have never seen such a system that I thought worked or wasn't just gamed into uselessness. Do you have any examples of systems that worked well?

[deleted]

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#433

Post by leereeves » Mon, Nov 04, 2024, 5:28 PM UTC

quandrum wrote: post #408

stickfigure wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> workers can be terminated only for misconduct or another such reason This is such a weird request for technology workers. You want to work with low-performing coworkers?

No, I want management to develop a system to determine who is low-performing, document when those workers don't meet the standards of performance, and reference those documents when they fire someone. It's just asking for due process.

> I want management to develop a system to determine who is low-performing

You're asking them to solve a problem people have been working on for decades without success. How can they measure productivity of tech workers?

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#434

Post by FredPret » Mon, Nov 04, 2024, 5:28 PM UTC

ewhanley wrote: post #341

ponector wrote: post #194

I totally support their demand for remote work. NY Times should hire more remote! They could save a lot by hiring offshore without hassle of providing benefits or fighting unions.

If this was such an easy proposition and there was actually arbitrage available, why haven't they already done it. If the market is to be believed, this would only be a temporary boost if it were even achievable. Demand goes up for offshore workers, their prices start to rise, and the delta closes.

This has happened with several offshore manufacturing destinations already.

These formerly poor countries become middle class and then manufacturing has to shift to one of remaining poor countries.

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#435

Post by aliasxneo » Mon, Nov 04, 2024, 5:28 PM UTC

code_for_monkey wrote: post #396

Eumenes wrote: post #385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

this is just racism

Interestingly, this comment can be interpreted both ways. The act of pushing people through a lower barrier based on their race can be inferred as racist, or the claim that such a thing is happening can also be inferred as racist.

I spent eight years at Google, starting long before these DEI mandates came in (and did over a hundred interviews during that period). I think the person you're responding to is being sensationalist, but I also feel the way these measures were rolled out did end up missing out on a lot of great hires due to them not fitting the perceived makeup of the company.

Funnily enough, I recall a specific meeting where they were planning to roll out measures to equalize pay between male and females. Prior to the rollout, they did an internal audit to understand the extent of the problem, and the audit came back highly favoring females over males. To Google's credit, they didn't move forward with it.

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#436

Post by lucianbr » Mon, Nov 04, 2024, 5:29 PM UTC

dehrmann wrote: post #383

legitster wrote: post #323

> The two sides negotiated until late Sunday. The sticking points in recent days were over whether they could get a “just cause” provision in their contract, which means workers can be terminated only for misconduct or another such reason; pay increases and pay equity; and return-to-office policies. This seems like a LOT of issues that still need to be hammered out. It would be one thing if they were disagreeing abou…

> Striking during election week is kind of a crappy move to pull Siblings are doubting this, but you can think of it like price gouging. It's the right behavior for extracting maximum value, but it burns a lot of trust, and that's important for a long-term business arrangement. It's playing the short game when they should be playing the long game.

Maybe there is little trust left? I don't know about NYT in particular, but the news regularly suggests employees trusting businesses are nothing but suckers.

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#437

Post by sunjester » Mon, Nov 04, 2024, 5:29 PM UTC

do we really need them there?

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#438

Post by miltonlost » Mon, Nov 04, 2024, 5:29 PM UTC

DoneWithAllThat wrote: post #416

miltonlost wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You find it reasonable. THe union, and I, do not find a RTO announcement in June (or anytime really) to be a reasonable request. So yes, the article justified the strike. You just don't think the justification is reasonable.

You don’t think it’s reasonable to tell your employees that as a condition of employment they have to be at a specific location at specific times?

If they are tech workers who only need a laptop and can work remotely 3 days a week normally, and therefore 5 as well? Yes, its unreasonable as their specific location at a specific time is unnecessary. If you don't need to be physically present to work, then it is unreasonable to force someone to relocate or to come into an office.

Is it reasonable to tell your factory worker employees that they have to be at the factory at certain times? Yes, that's reasonable because these workers must be physically there.

Using broad words like "employees" and "employment" simplifies your thinking.

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#439

Post by VWWHFSfQ » Mon, Nov 04, 2024, 5:30 PM UTC

drawkward wrote: post #393

VWWHFSfQ wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have lots of experience hiring tech people. Most of the time they turn out to be just as good as we thought they would be. But sometimes they don't. It would be terrible if it was impossible for us to let those people go.

It would be terrible for businesses to fire people arbitrarily. I'd rather give more rights to individuals than to businesses, because I am biased in an anti-business way: businesses arent bounded by human lifespans or biological constraints, get preferential treatment by the American legal system, have orders of magnitude more money and political power than individuals. It's almost like the USA fought a war and char…

Off-shoring is already very prevalent in US tech work. So there certainly needs to be a balance in workers rights and business interest if those jobs are going to stay domestic. In general I agree with your perspective. But there is a harsh alternative reality that we're going to continue to face in the tech workforce.

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#440

Post by FredPret » Mon, Nov 04, 2024, 5:30 PM UTC

ponector wrote: post #194

I totally support their demand for remote work. NY Times should hire more remote! They could save a lot by hiring offshore without hassle of providing benefits or fighting unions.

Have you ever done knowledge work with offshore contributors?

It’s challenging to say the least. Even when working between first-world countries speaking English, there’s a host of serious problems. Cultural differences; different expectations; time zone differences.