Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

711–720 of 1001 posts

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#711

Post by anon84873628 »

dml2135 wrote: post #701
Aurornis wrote: post #655

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article (which is paywalled) says average compensation is $190,000. They also have 600 technologists on staff, which is massively higher than comparable news organizations. I think this is the real elephant in the room: They're hiring (and therefore spending) at a rate that already far outstrips comparable news organizations.

What news organizations truly compare to the NYT tech game though? As far as I can tell, they are at the top.

Comparing to other "news organizations" might not make sense if we're including Wirecutter and the games division (e.g. Wordle) on the NYT side. They should be compared to other types of media orgs.

Not that NYT hasn't done some interesting innovative technical stuff within their journalism.

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#712

Post by downrightmike »

dctoedt wrote: post #134

The timing isn't going to win a lot of friends — there's a public interest involved here, as journos keep telling us.

NYT has had two years to make a contract and they dragged their feet. Good on the union for hitting them where it hurts.

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#713

Post by foota »

rapind wrote: post #596
foota wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 negoti…

If they didn't like their contract, the responsible thing to do would have been to go on strike earlier or quit. Waiting till the moment of maximal pain is just spiteful and done in bad faith.

Ultimately, labor unions exist to extract additional compensation from employers. Imo in cases where the employer can afford it and the employees in question are being unfairly treated, I think it's reasonable for them to quit or strike in good faith, but I don't think many of those things are true here.

Newspapers are barely surviving these days. These people took jobs at the nytimes knowing they wouldn't make big tech salaries, and most companies have ended WFH policies. If they can force the NYTimes to give them concessions by holding them hostage during one of the most contentious moments in US history, I won't admire them one bit.

Lastly, thanks for drawing that better comparison. It still wouldn't be right for the firefighters to let someone's house burn down in that case.

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#714

Post by downrightmike »

Regarding RTO:

https://thehill.com/opinion/technology/4747313-remote-work-b...

The research backs up all the good things that have come out of remote working since at least the pandemic started. Everything is great, employees do better work and the employer gets better work done. Which was never in doubt if you look at research and metrics.

The kerfuffle about remote being bad only has the stated negative of something about "culture" according to every company that is forcing people off of remote work.

What they don't tell you is

1: the company wants to shift their tax burden to workers from local governments.

2: It is impacting the Commercial Real-estate that the leadership team and board members are getting paid for, on the back end, for leasing office spaces back to the company.

Further:

3: The company is already or will be soon opening a remote team office in Hydrabad, so they are already going to lose #1 and #2 and still not have a decent culture.

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#715

Post by stogot »

quandrum wrote: post #429
stogot wrote: post #424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes you think they don’t have that?

Because the union is striking over it

That conclusion does not explain your arguments. The place is over 100 years old and surely have HR processes. This is more likely about the union trying to prevent layoffs

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#716

Post by WalterBright »

RobRivera wrote: post #479
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?

Bc management never abuses the optics to force out people that they dont like, vs someone productive, ever.

Usually they don't like someone because they are poor performers. As a person who has owned a business with employees, you naturally like the ones that are making you money. In fact, I'd put up with a whole lot of things I don't like if they make money for me.

As a manager, I'd naturally want to retain the people who made me look good to my manager, regardless of my personal feelings.

Having a personal vendetta against particular employees has never happened in my experience, though it's been alleged a lot.

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#717

Post by lolinder »

donohoe wrote: post #607
lolinder wrote: post #573

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

So maybe I mis-read but... The comment I was replying to suggests the reporter is pro-NYT but you are suggesting that the reporter is pro-Union? Maybe the reporter did a great job after all :)

Nope, I'm saying that them being part of an unrelated union does not change the fact that they have a conflict of interest in reporting here.

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#718

Post by buffington »

ChrisArchitect wrote: post #710

Related :/ Perplexity CEO offers to replace striking NYT staff with AI https://techcrunch.com/2024/11/04/perplexity-ceo-offers-to-r...

I think the NYT should take him up on that offer. Those striking can probably pull off a 404media business model instead while they watch NYT turn into USA Today, except worse.

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#719

Post by lxgr »

ChrisArchitect wrote: post #710

Related :/ Perplexity CEO offers to replace striking NYT staff with AI https://techcrunch.com/2024/11/04/perplexity-ceo-offers-to-r...

Did he actually say that?

Because in the article, there's only a tweet of him saying that Perplexity is "on standby to help", of which "offering to replace striking staff with AI" seems a pretty strong mischaracterization.

Update: The headline (but not the URL) was just changed to "Perplexity CEO offers AI company’s services to replace striking NYT staff" (emphasis mine).

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#720

Post by anon84873628 »

HDThoreaun wrote: post #686
lc9er wrote: post #571

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of the anti-union tech workers I've encountered over my career have vastly overestimated their abilities and value to the workforce. Their willingness to suffer abuse from employers (while taking pride in their refusal to establish boundaries) makes working conditions worse for all of us.

Most of the pro-union tech workers I know have never been forced to join a corrupt union that does nothing to help them while keeping the good old boys who contribute little to the company employed. Many tech workers are paid in stock so theres tons of incentive to get rid of low performers.

Sounds like a best of both worlds scenario. The overconfident tech bros can get to work "disrupting" unions and re-learning the same lessons.
Post reply on HN