Live data from Hacker News

New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

washingtonpost.com

591–600 of 1001 posts

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#591
post #447

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.

This sounds good, but in my experience bad employees were known to everyone. It was difficult to pinpoint exactly why they were bad or toxic, but pretty much everyone agreed. If you gave them some benchmark they would need to hit (e.g. close tickets, be on call, etc), they would be able to do so. So creating a documentation trail is difficult, especially if its based on people saying they don't think he does good wor…

You can still be pro-worker even if you think sometimes a certain worker is bad, or hard to work with, or otherwise a "bad employee." It is more something political and something about how you view the world/humanity in general. It is not an "identity politics" where the discussion is around certain kinds of people or not. That would be kinda silly anyway on its face, we are virtually all workers!

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#592
post #444

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"Why would anybody trust a NYT article about internal drama at the NYT? Does HN not understand bias?" >links to a blog post from the union

Descriptions from both sides are now included, what did you want here?

You don't account for bias by having two equally biased things from opposite sides of the conversation.

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#593
post #579

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hello - former NYT employee here, who would have been part of the Guild union if I worked there still. The story is written by a reporter, Katie Robertson, who is also part of their own union (Times Guild). The Times has been pretty good at covering itself imho.

NYT's political coverage has been extremely poor this year, with very obvious editorial control preventing negative coverage of Trump. It's not obvious to me they have a bias here, but given the clear systemic issues in other reporting it's reasonable to bring a skeptical view to their own reporting.

Yeah, it get why its not obvious. That is why I was weighing in. Nothing more.

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#594
post #525

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.

Isn't employment in the US At-Will anyways?

Yes in absence of an employment contract that says otherwise. One of the primary objectives of any US union is to establish guidelines for dismissal of employee members that override at-will.

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#595

With the shit show that the current tech industry has turned into, unionization is crucial. US has a very low percentage of unionized workers compared to Iceland, Finland and Scandinavian countries for instance. Time to change and make our voice heard.

In what way do you think the current tech industry has turned into a shit show?

I think tech workers have gotten a little spoiled. At my company, we have about 35 people in our IT department. 3/4 are directors and managers and I honestly have no fucking idea what they do all day. 600 people on the IT staff at the NYT is insane, and I guarantee the majority of those jobs is "attend meetings every day to jerk each other off with 1 deliverable a week".

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#596
post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's crappy about the union striking when they have leverage? Should they have waited until the strike would apply less pressure to their employer?

Because waiting for the time when you can apply the most leverage is a shitty thing to do? How would you feel if your house was on fire and the fire fighters went on strike only then to demand they be given bounties? They had a contract, waiting for the time when the work they do is absolutely critical is antisocial behavior. Society is built on people honoring their commitments.

> How would you feel if your house was on fire and the fire fighters went on strike only then to demand they be given bounties?

What a terrible analogy promoting a ridiculous narrative.

A better analogy is if it's the mayors house on fire, it was predetermined when exactly the mayors house would catch fire, the mayor had been warned well in advance of his house catching fire that the firefighters would like to negotiate their contract, and had in fact been involved in negotiations for years already. Not quite the same zing to it though...

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#597

> 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

NYTimes has dragged out the negotiations for months, refusing to have a contract. It's kinda a make or break time for the union.

When would be better to strike, what time would NYTimes and the audience prefer? It should be during a choke point otherwise management wouldn't listen.

Additionally, this is a high traffic time, but not really a high stakes time I'd argue. They're not going to influence the election by going out day before or day of it, they will just lose viewership to others covering what's happening.

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#598

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hello - former NYT employee here, who would have been part of the Guild union if I worked there still. The story is written by a reporter, Katie Robertson, who is also part of their own union (Times Guild). The Times has been pretty good at covering itself imho.

> who is also part of their own union (Times Guild). This doesn't remove the conflict of interest because it's not the same union. Those in the other unions may well be more sympathetic to the company than to the strikers, especially given the timing of the strike. It's likely interfering with their jobs right now in pursuit of a negotiation that they don't stand to gain from.

If we used the Wall Street Journal, they'd also have a conflict interest, because their company competes with the New York Times.

I really think this is silly. If there is anything specific you don't think the New York Times article is presenting fairly, please share that.

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#599
post #592

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Descriptions from both sides are now included, what did you want here?

You don't account for bias by having two equally biased things from opposite sides of the conversation.

Well it is better than having only one side.

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#600
post #494

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's very common in union contracts. They way it usually works is there is a probationary period that you can fire someone under for any reason (usually 90 days), but after that, supposedly you're more protected. That said, in practice, it doesn't really prevent you from being part of a layoff or anything. You'll just get more notice and complaints.

Probation periods are a mess, b/c they incentivizes "hire and fire".

Though only for employers that don't care who they hire in the first place, if you fire someone simply because they might be harder to fire lately you don't really care about who you hired.
Post reply on HN