Hacker News Reader

Comment by 7thpower | Hacker News Reader

[flagged]

No one has a right, legally or morally, to another person's labor if they can't come to terms. Workers have power when they act together, and in this case are using that power strategically to advance their interests and those of many other workers.

If management were rational actors, they would have reached a deal at some point in the last two years of bargaining.

You might want to research the topic of strikes & unions.

The timple truth is that it's a give and take. If the demands would be too extreme the NYT would go bankrupt and the workers lose out on their job.

Thus, it's in their best interest to have reasonable demands. Most people forgett this part.

The workers, collectively, formed demands. At some point the burden should be on the employer to explain why the demands are not reasonable.

Well strikes are only effective when they hurt. I fully support aiming strikes at points of time when they have most impact. That is only way to show importance of the workers. Maybe excluding things like natural emergencies.

That is what strikes are by definition, yes. It doesn't just seem like it. There is no other weapon workers can wield if they don't have a legal basis to make leadership meet their demands.

Obviously this can backfire in countries that don't have good union law and if you are too replaceable (hello AI).

Not quite. Extortion is defined by introducing force. A strike is defined by withdrawing force.

Except this is legal. Extortion is typically not.

This isn't Extortion because there's no gun to your head saying you HAVE to provide labor. At least in most industries. If I choose not to help you, I'm not extorting anything - you're free to find someone else. If you can't, and I'm your only option, that's still your problem, not mine.

Extortion is defined by action (e.g. threat of violence). A strike is defined by inaction (the workers quit working).

What do they protest against though? Exploitation.

Who has more power; employees or employers?

I think leverage is the word you're looking for.

> This genuinely seems like extortion.

extortion implies extorionate demands. the demands here are ... checks notes ... remote work and protection from arbitrary termination.

I mean, unless you're arguing that employers are in some sense entitled to the labour of their employees under terms dictated by the employer, I'm not sure how that works.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com