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

491–500 of 675 posts

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

#491

Post by IncreasePosts »

Rinzler89 wrote: post #477
IncreasePosts wrote: post #474

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The present day issues aren't caused by skin color or race, it's just haves vs have nots, elite vs plebs Can you possibly think of a reason why black people might be highly over-represented in the "have nots" group in America? Go out on a limb, what could it possibly be.

What about the other color of skins who are also part of the "have nots"? Are they not also affected? Why must the focus always be on the skin color instead of on the "not have" part? What's with this racism shit? You're only proving my point that I made above, that people care more about punching up against a skin color they consider have an unfair advantage due to past history, but which won't improve their situati…

Of course people with other skin color are also affected by poverty, or whatever it means to be a have-not, why wouldn't they be?

I didn't say the focus must be on skin color. I'm saying to disregard why certain groups are represented in the haves/have-nots, you must ignore history.

I don't believe you're arguing in good faith if you think point out that racism exists/existed, and you call that "racism shit"

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

#492

Post by devnullbrain »

deepsun wrote: post #429
jimbokun wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> * Women, who make up 41% of the Tech Guild, earn 12% less on average than men > * Black women and Hispanic or Latina women, who make up just over 6 percent of the Tech Guild, make 33% less than white men in the unit > * Black workers, who make up 7 percent of the union, earn 26% less than white workers Do they work equivalent jobs with equivalent experience?

It's averages. It could take as little as one ultra-high-paying worker (like CEO) to skew the statistics of averages.

There's not enough information to derive this. Mean is a subset of things we call average, not a synonym of it.

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

#493

Post by matrix87 »

marxisttemp wrote: post #375

Let’s all remember that the vast majority of programmers are not mathematicians, nor logicians, nor authors, we are tradespeople. And you’ll notice that tradespeople in almost every other industry unionize.

Are traditional engineers considered tradespeople by your definition?

I kind of doubt actual tradespeople would be fond of us referring to ourselves as one of them

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

#494

Post by busterarm »

andsoitis wrote: post #319
janalsncm wrote: post #258

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.

> I wonder how other news outlets will cover this, if at all. You are reading this on another news outlet! Last year, NYT tech workers also had a strike over return -to-office, as covered by Reuters: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/new-york-times-tech-workers...

Tbf, I wouldn't want to go back to that office. That area of NY is always swarmed with NYPDESU and is kind of a shithole.

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

#495

Post by thierrydamiba »

bad_user wrote: post #487
umvi wrote: post #475

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you read books from the early 1900s (Radium Girls, Rocket Boys, Seabiscuit), it's painfully obvious to see how incredibly exploitative industries can become (literally working people to death) without something like a union to check corporate greed against worker well-being. It's a fine balance though. Unions are organizations very similar to companies and can fall victim to the same sins as exploitative companies…

It should also be painfully obvious that, during those times, the alternative — subsistence agriculture — was much worse, and people working in factories no longer starved. The industrial revolution, AKA "greed", has ended starvation and slavery, so when socialists of late 1800s or early 1900s talk of exploitation, that should raise an eyebrow. Unions are not similar to companies because they don't compete on the fre…

Just fyi the UN estimates 25,000 people die from hunger everyday and there are currently 50 million slaves around the world. Easy to forget but these things still exist.

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

#496

Post by [deleted] »

Workaccount2 wrote: post #392
marxisttemp wrote: post #375

Let’s all remember that the vast majority of programmers are not mathematicians, nor logicians, nor authors, we are tradespeople. And you’ll notice that tradespeople in almost every other industry unionize.

Programmers are white collar engineers, I think you are confused here. Doesn't mean they can't create/join a union, but they are not really in the tradesman category. White collar unions are much tinier.

[deleted]

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

#497

Post by wnolens »

devwastaken wrote: post #336
skapadia wrote: post #333

Highly talented software engineers are still hard to find. If you find one, pay them well and do everything you can to retain them.

This is because software dev is a volatile market. It doesn't matter how "talented" you are, it's about your rank in the social circles and it shows in the product. There is now far more devs than there is work for them. This is a planned strategy to reduce salaries. If you're "talented". Make your money and get out asap.

Strange to read, not my experience at all.

> it's about your rank in the social circles

It's among the most meritocratic I have a view into (from conversations with friends in.. mechanical engineering, entrepreneurship, academia, nonprofit, sales, education, ..)

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

#498

Post by dfedbeef »

bad_user wrote: post #487
umvi wrote: post #475

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you read books from the early 1900s (Radium Girls, Rocket Boys, Seabiscuit), it's painfully obvious to see how incredibly exploitative industries can become (literally working people to death) without something like a union to check corporate greed against worker well-being. It's a fine balance though. Unions are organizations very similar to companies and can fall victim to the same sins as exploitative companies…

It should also be painfully obvious that, during those times, the alternative — subsistence agriculture — was much worse, and people working in factories no longer starved. The industrial revolution, AKA "greed", has ended starvation and slavery, so when socialists of late 1800s or early 1900s talk of exploitation, that should raise an eyebrow. Unions are not similar to companies because they don't compete on the fre…

"Nobody starved to death in the 1800s or early 1900s" is an interesting take.

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

#499

Post by fatbird »

bad_user wrote: post #487
umvi wrote: post #475

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you read books from the early 1900s (Radium Girls, Rocket Boys, Seabiscuit), it's painfully obvious to see how incredibly exploitative industries can become (literally working people to death) without something like a union to check corporate greed against worker well-being. It's a fine balance though. Unions are organizations very similar to companies and can fall victim to the same sins as exploitative companies…

It should also be painfully obvious that, during those times, the alternative — subsistence agriculture — was much worse, and people working in factories no longer starved. The industrial revolution, AKA "greed", has ended starvation and slavery, so when socialists of late 1800s or early 1900s talk of exploitation, that should raise an eyebrow. Unions are not similar to companies because they don't compete on the fre…

Whether state-funded institutions and unions are more corrupt than private enterprise is an empirical question. Do you have empirical data to back this up?

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

#500

Post by kmeisthax »

Rinzler89 wrote: post #313
mensetmanusman wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because dei and the nyt focus on that being important.

[flagged]

And, funnily enough, this kind of divide-and-conquer exploitation also happens to create incredibly homogenous workplaces. The reason why these horrible workplaces have fewer black people or women is because the business practices - i.e. lots of crunch time, toxic workplace environment, shitty mismanagement, etc - filter out people who don't have the tolerance for that shit. It just so happens that young white men happen to be the least sensitive to bad business practices (because of all that stuff the woke left packaged into the word "privilege") so they're the last one standing.

Most corporate DEI is less "what can we do to retain power minority employees" and more "how can we turn minorities into more effective worker drones that we can then abuse". This is less because they actually want diversity and more because they want to be able to put the word "diversity" in a mission statement. It's left-wing[0] language being coopted to serve the purposes of cutthroat capitalism. "Diversity" happens to be a popular term with the people who are currently their most abusable worker drones. So they apply it liberally to make them think they're winning when they're losing.

This works the other way too - effective labor organization and opposition to corporate power needs (actual) DEI just as (again, actual) DEI needs organized labor. Collective solidarity cannot function if you leave out certain groups of people, otherwise you're not doing a revolution, you're doing a changing of the guard.

[0] Libertarian left specifically. Yes, there is an "anti-woke left", it's called the Chinese Communist Party.

Post reply on HN