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

751–760 of 1001 posts

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#751

Post by Manuel_D »

downrightmike wrote: post #714

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 somethin…

There's other research that suggests remote work isn't as effective: https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2023/06/28/t...

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#752

Post by interactivecode »

wesselbindt wrote: post #670
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 I couldn't disagree more. The point of a strike is to demonstrate the value of your labor by withholding it. Withholding your labor in a slow week would be counterproductive. Strikes (just like any effective form of protest) are supposed to be inconvenient, so in saying what you said, you're really just expressing you don't like strikes. Having this blo…

Isn’t the whole point of a strike to withhold value?

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#753

Post by janalsncm »

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?

It’s a negotiation. What is reasonable is for the two parties to determine. But it’s not crazy to imagine. This is not Walter White asking to work remotely from a professional-grade chemistry lab. These are tech workers who can carry the professional-grade equipment in their backpacks.

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#754

Post by lodger »

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.

[dead]

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#755

Post by mrguyorama »

heraldgeezer wrote: post #317
vijucat wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Genuine question: what prevents the NYT from offshoring these jobs if they can be done from home? I feel for you, as a fellow worker, but unless there is something hyper-local about the job such as regulatory requirements or trust issues with IP protection, the jobs will go to the ones who work hard without complaining too much.

I have seen this before and it hit me. What is the point? Is the end goal to just have management in a nice office and all production including hr, finance and IT overseas?? I mean those are office jobs, so they can WFH, so they can be in India or Philipines!! :) Wow saving so much money!!! Does a company work in a country or will they just take and take and take from the country and then not give jobs? Almost making…

The purpose, point, goal, and desire of a company, which in real terms means the people who work in the C-Suite and make all the choices, is to make as much money as possible. They have no loyalties, it's more profitable that way.

For example, multiple fast food companies have driven themselves into the ground by exploiting their franchise owners for fast cash. That's how Quiznos died. You would think murdering a company would actually be bad for C level people, but they just move on to the next company. They never seem to have a problem getting hired despite their past performance.

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#756

Post by jedberg »

legitster wrote: post #699
wesselbindt wrote: post #670

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Striking during election week is kind of a crappy move to pull I couldn't disagree more. The point of a strike is to demonstrate the value of your labor by withholding it. Withholding your labor in a slow week would be counterproductive. Strikes (just like any effective form of protest) are supposed to be inconvenient, so in saying what you said, you're really just expressing you don't like strikes. Having this blo…

Sure, but you are also appealing for public sentiment. So there's a reason why teacher's unions carefully time their strikes so they don't clash with important events like SAT season. I'm not arguing they need to pick the slowest week, but striking a balance seems pretty reasonable and pretty standard for most other unions.

The teachers are a little different though. When they go on strike, the most directly affected people are the students, who they aren't negotiating with. Second hand effects are on the parents, who again they aren't negotiating with.

It's only via third hand effects that the other party is actually affected, because the parents have to make the admin's life hard.

So teachers consider that their first duty is to the students. Also they are there to help the students to begin with.

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#757

Post by micromacrofoot »

lxgr wrote: post #719
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).

The full quote is

> Hey AG Sulzberger @nytimes sorry to see this. Perplexity is on standby to help ensure your essential coverage is available to all through the election. DM me anytime here.”

it's absolutely scab behavior

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#758

Post by WalterBright »

eikenberry wrote: post #728
WalterBright wrote: post #700

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A sensible person would not have their finances stretched so thin that they cannot deal with an interruption in their employment. I.e. one should be setting aside at least 10% of their income. I worked for a company once that was doing poorly, and management decided to do an across-the-board 10% pay cut. One of my coworkers was livid with rage. I asked him why didn't he just quit and get another job? He said he didn'…

Savings don't protect you from the stress unless you've saved enough to retire. Savings provides a buffer of time you get to find another job, but you still have to find (and land) that job. Given how f'd-up tech hiring is and the current job market that might not be as easy as it sounds... So I can understand why people want to avoid that level of stress and the compromises they will make to do that.

Having savings to give you a buffer of time is much less stressful than no savings.

Re: New York Times Tech Guild goes on strike

#759

Post by seabass-labrax »

marricks wrote: post #733
notatoad wrote: post #698

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>When would be better to strike i think the point the parent is making is that a better time to strike would be when they have specific demands that management is able to meet - to get them to the negotiating table, or to get them to sign a contract. but in the case where management is already at the negotiating table, and there's no contract to be signed, it's not clear what short-term goal a strike is meant to achi…

> when they have specific demands that management is able to meet It's just wild how management is able to unilaterally decide what is and isn't reasonable, and just label unions as childish. "We want to help you, but you're hurting us!" is one small step away from "gosh we love the idea of unions but it causes too much friction between workers and management, and trust me, management knows best."

I don't think parent is defending the management here; rather pointing out that it's a strategic error to play your strongest negotiating card before you are ready to make the deal. True, the New York Times will miss out on the election coverage bonanza this time, but unless the union can say "sign here to make this problem go away" they are just hurting the management for nothing. I've only heard of the story today, but it doesn't sound like the union even has a written offer ready.
Post reply on HN