UN Slate workers to strike over diversity

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
https://thehill.com/homenews/media/420771-newly-unionized-slate-staff-votes-to-strike

Recently unionized writers and editors at Slate have reportedly voted almost unanimously to strike over concerns about the company's diversity policies and a rule mandating that union fees be optional for Slate employees.

Bloomberg News reports that Slate employees voted 52 to 1 in favor of a strike and have begun considering when workers will walk out. A spokesman for the union told Bloomberg that the rules mandating optional union fees at the left-leaning blog seemed to be a "betrayal" of the site's values.

“We just feel that it’s a total and absolute betrayal of Slate’s most fundamental values,” Slate writer Mark Joseph Stern told Bloomberg.

A request for comment from Slate was not immediately returned. Representatives for Slates's union released a chain of messages on Twitter Tuesday morning following the vote, further accusing Slate management of trying to "degrade the legitimacy" of Slate's union.

"We’ve been bargaining our contract for 8 months. We’re excited by a lot of what we’ve achieved at the table. But we’re still dismayed by management’s position on certain key issues," the union tweeted.

"Most crucially, our unit continues to be outraged by management’s inclusion of a right-to-work clause, a technique designed to degrade the legitimacy of our union," the account continued. "We love Slate. We want make the strongest, best Slate possible. But Slate is its workers—it’s the writers, editors, producers, and staffers who make the magazine."

The Writers Guild of America, East, which represents Slate's union, told The Hill in a statement that Slate staffers were fighting for a "reasonable" contract with management.

“The WGAE-represented employees at Slate have made two things clear to management: they want a reasonable contract that addresses their needs and respects their decision to unionize, and they're willing to fight for it. The Writers Guild of America, East and its thousands of members stand with the Slate employees, and we know that solidarity works," the group's executive director, Lowell Peterson, said.

Bloomberg reports that Slate workers had previously employed other in-office forms of protest before resorting to Tuesday's vote, including at least one hourlong "Slack strike" where employees would sign off or refuse to answer messages on the office communication platform.

TL;DR Slate workers mad over diversity policies within the company, and the Writers' Guild approves of the strike.
 
Slate employees voted 52 to 1 in favor of a strike

How long before they root out the neonazi bigot who voted against it and lynch them?

"Most crucially, our unit continues to be outraged by management’s inclusion of a right-to-work clause, a technique designed to degrade the legitimacy of our union,"

"Most importantly they won't let us strong arm people into paying into our racket."

Every time I see this union shit in America I'm more greatful to Maggie for fucking them up here.
 
Bloomberg reports that Slate workers had previously employed other in-office forms of protest before resorting to Tuesday's vote, including at least one hourlong "Slack strike" where employees would sign off or refuse to answer messages on the office communication platform.
Haha, it's literally Slacktivism.
 
How can union fees be optional?

Either you're in the union and pay (too much) for the benefits they offer as a part of your membership, or you're not in the union and don't.
 
How can union fees be optional?

Either you're in the union and pay (too much) for the benefits they offer as a part of your membership, or you're not in the union and don't.

The union negotiates on the behalf of all workers, therefor any contract the union hammers out applies to everyone, even non-union members. There are "fair share" rules where non-union employees don't get the benefits of union representation (obviously) but that's how it works when joining the union isn't mandatory (as in right-to-work states.)

That said, I wonder what leverage these sub-Buzzfeed-tier bloggers imagine they have over the management. Shitlib outrage clickbait is the lowest hanging fruit out there.
 
Oh no, what will Slate do if their clickbait writers go on 1 hour email strikes? I hear there's a bunch of equally shitty Mic.com rejects looking for a gig. Firing a bunch of useless limpdicks and replacing them with new useless limpdicks that are desperate enough to bitch less seems like an easy win.

Slate is probably due for the "go broke" cycle of their wokeness anyway. Hope this speeds up the inevitable.
 
Did I miss it or did the article not talk about the diversity part at all? Who wants to bet it's about diversity of opinion, and not just "we need more melanin"?
 
Every time I see this union shit in America I'm more greatful to Maggie for fucking them up here.

Politicizing your workforce is the first step to workers being more concerned with insider political maneuvering and contract stipulations than doing their jobs....


Also, the recent USSC Janus ruling means you can't force anyone to pay Union dues, this "threat" is more empty than ever.
 
Last edited:
Honestly, I’m with the strikers on this one.
You wanna run your oh-so-woke rag on these leftist ideals? You can goddamn well sit down and eat crow over the results.
They wanted hardline leftist politics in their workplace. They got em. Enjoy, fuckers.

This is like being mad because you run Breitbart and people started open carrying in your office. This is what you wanted. You got it.
 
How many of those striking are white? I'm going to guess the majority, so it seems simple, fire all the white workers in the name of diversity and watch the #woke crowd lose their damn minds. For bonus points, replace them all for autistic disabled transwomen of color.
Politicizing your workforce is the first step to workers being more concerned with insider political maneuvering and contract stipulations than doing their jobs....


Also, the recent USSC Janus ruling means you can't force anyone to pay Union dues, this "threat" is more empty than ever.
Union sperging here: Janus v. AFSCME only affects public sector unions. The writers guild is a private sector union, and thus is only affected by current state laws like right to work.

why not call yourself useless fag union to begin with?
be usefull as a union and people will be happy to become members. for the few who dont, well there is no law that forces you to talk to scabs.
Simple, because the unions hate having to actually answer to their employees. :powerlevel:I see this quite often, and Janus has created a LOT of tension among the union higher-ups, despite the fact the answer is simple, if they had not donated hundreds of millions to Hillary, this wouldn't have happened. Their workers are largely demanding transparency and better communication, something the higher ups are dragging their feet on, and there have already been both union due cancellations and successful leadership challenges due to the union's inability to work with their own members.:powerlevel:
 
Hopefully both parties can resolve their differences and wipe the slate clean
 
Honestly, I’m with the strikers on this one.
You wanna run your oh-so-woke rag on these leftist ideals? You can goddamn well sit down and eat crow over the results.
They wanted hardline leftist politics in their workplace. They got em. Enjoy, fuckers.

This is like being mad because you run Breitbart and people started open carrying in your office. This is what you wanted. You got it.
Almost every modern company is woke and supports diversity until Unionism is brought up, then they transform into Thatcherites overnight.
 
Back
Top Bottom