4 ms·

In a large and varied company like the New York Times you’re going to have multiple Unions representing different workers. The printers won’t usually be in the

In a large and varied company like the New York Times you’re going to have multiple Unions representing different workers. The printers won’t usually be in the same union as the tech workers. You’ll always have a mix of union and non-union work since managers can’t be in the union and certain types of work may not be covered by one of the current unions.

goodluckchuck 5y ago
Thanks for the response. I’m surprised that managers generally aren’t allowed in unions. But then I guess that’s probably a case by case thing with different criteria for different unions. Still, there are 20+ million “managers” according to the AFLCIO, excluding professionals who manage staff, e.g. some engineers, doctors, etc. Probably 10–20% of all workers. https://www.dpeaflcio.org/factsheets/the-professional-and-technical-workforce-by-the-numbers https://www.dpeaflcio.org/factsheets/the-professional-and-te...
- freedomben 5y ago
  At least the unions I've been around, managers were the ones the unions were there to keep in check. It would have been very undermining to the union if the managers were part of it.
- native_samples 5y ago
  The whole point of unions is to create an us vs them setup in which "management" is the enemy and "workers" are the poor oppressed victims. You can't have a union with managers in it for that reason, such an organization would be the same thing as the company itself. One reason unions make no sense in the tech world is that the line between "workers" and "managers" is often very blurry. What is a tech lead, for example? And of course the whole notion of class warfare being something to encourage is just an obsolete and very dangerous early 20th century Marxist idea. Most sensible people have disposed of it a long time ago, but no surprise the New York Times never let it go given the extremism and bias of their staff.
baud147258 5y ago
> since managers can’t be in the union can there be an union of managers then?

goodluckchuck 5y ago

Thanks for the response. I’m surprised that managers generally aren’t allowed in unions. But then I guess that’s probably a case by case thing with different criteria for different unions. Still, there are 20+ million “managers” according to the AFLCIO, excluding professionals who manage staff, e.g. some engineers, doctors, etc. Probably 10–20% of all workers. https://www.dpeaflcio.org/factsheets/the-professional-and-technical-workforce-by-the-numbers https://www.dpeaflcio.org/factsheets/the-professional-and-te...

freedomben 5y ago
At least the unions I've been around, managers were the ones the unions were there to keep in check. It would have been very undermining to the union if the managers were part of it.
native_samples 5y ago
The whole point of unions is to create an us vs them setup in which "management" is the enemy and "workers" are the poor oppressed victims. You can't have a union with managers in it for that reason, such an organization would be the same thing as the company itself. One reason unions make no sense in the tech world is that the line between "workers" and "managers" is often very blurry. What is a tech lead, for example? And of course the whole notion of class warfare being something to encourage is just an obsolete and very dangerous early 20th century Marxist idea. Most sensible people have disposed of it a long time ago, but no surprise the New York Times never let it go given the extremism and bias of their staff.

baud147258 5y ago

> since managers can’t be in the union can there be an union of managers then?