6 ms·

Doing this right after your employees unionize makes you an asshole. Especially if you're a billionaire. Especially if you delete the archives. But. He's a Tr

Doing this right after your employees unionize makes you an asshole. Especially if you're a billionaire. Especially if you delete the archives. But. He's a Trump supporter. So he's probably firmly of the belief that the little people are trying to steal too much out of the pockets of the wealthy. (I'm also curious exactly what "good journalism" means to him, because a lot of "good journalism" coming from that side of the fence isn't "good jounrnalism" in the traditional sense of the phrase.) I hope the journalists involved can build themselves something new. And I hope this doesn't cool future attempts to unionize.

leereeves 9y ago
> after he originally sought to prevent [Trump's] nomination during the primaries. Trump targeted Ricketts on Twitter before Ricketts offered his support. Probably not an enthusiastic supporter.
- thinkpad20 9y ago
  I suppose some of us don't have to be enthusiastic to donate a million dollars...?
  - leereeves 9y ago
    That's, what, 0.1% of his net worth? That's like an average family donating $100.
sctb 9y ago
> He's a Trump supporter. So he's probably... This sort of thing is a sign that what follows won't meet Hacker News' bar for substantiveness and flamebait-eschewance. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- theyregreat 9y ago
  Thanks, dad. In the meantime, the GP’s not “alt-facts” remain the apolitical reality of the rich vs. poor.
  - leereeves 9y ago
    Hacker News is a place for rational discussion, even between people who disagree. Not snark and hostility.
eps 9y ago
> Doing this right after your employees unionize makes you an asshole. No, it doesn't. Gothamist is not a small coal mining town where workers have all but one choice of an employer. There unions made sense. You don't bunch together, you and your family starve. Here, unionization is an attempt to squeeze more perks and money from their existing employer, simply because it's easier and more comfortable to do than to look for another job.
- anigbrowl 9y ago
  Did they go out on strike? No. they have every right to act collectively if that's how they prefer to structure their labor. Either freedom of association means something or it doesn't.
- ejnulls 9y ago
  LOL. Not unionizing is literally being a bad business-man/woman. Good business-people exploit all legal avenues to maximize their leverage...and if it's not legal, they lobby to make it legal so they can further maximize leverage. But I suppose it follows, a good business-person is a bad employee. However, I believe with every fiber of my being that employees should follow the examples set by their bosses to be successful. If the boss is doing everything to maximize their leverage over competitors (and their employees - ie pushing for more STEM education to increase supply of workers so they can pay them less), employees MUST follow in the footsteps of their bosses. Not exploiting every avenue for leverage in a system as cut-throat as capitalism only serves to exacerbaate inequality. Based on those thoughts, I believe unionizing is the patriotic thing to do. I will say though, I would love to see new types of unions emerge that are more efficient than those of yesteryear.

leereeves 9y ago

> after he originally sought to prevent [Trump's] nomination during the primaries. Trump targeted Ricketts on Twitter before Ricketts offered his support. Probably not an enthusiastic supporter.

thinkpad20 9y ago
I suppose some of us don't have to be enthusiastic to donate a million dollars...?
- leereeves 9y ago
  That's, what, 0.1% of his net worth? That's like an average family donating $100.

sctb 9y ago

> He's a Trump supporter. So he's probably... This sort of thing is a sign that what follows won't meet Hacker News' bar for substantiveness and flamebait-eschewance. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

theyregreat 9y ago
Thanks, dad. In the meantime, the GP’s not “alt-facts” remain the apolitical reality of the rich vs. poor.
- leereeves 9y ago
  Hacker News is a place for rational discussion, even between people who disagree. Not snark and hostility.

eps 9y ago

> Doing this right after your employees unionize makes you an asshole. No, it doesn't. Gothamist is not a small coal mining town where workers have all but one choice of an employer. There unions made sense. You don't bunch together, you and your family starve. Here, unionization is an attempt to squeeze more perks and money from their existing employer, simply because it's easier and more comfortable to do than to look for another job.

anigbrowl 9y ago
Did they go out on strike? No. they have every right to act collectively if that's how they prefer to structure their labor. Either freedom of association means something or it doesn't.
ejnulls 9y ago
LOL. Not unionizing is literally being a bad business-man/woman. Good business-people exploit all legal avenues to maximize their leverage...and if it's not legal, they lobby to make it legal so they can further maximize leverage. But I suppose it follows, a good business-person is a bad employee. However, I believe with every fiber of my being that employees should follow the examples set by their bosses to be successful. If the boss is doing everything to maximize their leverage over competitors (and their employees - ie pushing for more STEM education to increase supply of workers so they can pay them less), employees MUST follow in the footsteps of their bosses. Not exploiting every avenue for leverage in a system as cut-throat as capitalism only serves to exacerbaate inequality. Based on those thoughts, I believe unionizing is the patriotic thing to do. I will say though, I would love to see new types of unions emerge that are more efficient than those of yesteryear.