862
Wikimedia Foundation refuses voluntary union recognition, hires union-busting law firm
(en.wikipedia.org)
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
A few months ago I cancelled my donations due to them firing a group of workers who stated their intent to unionize.
I've never even considered donating since I learned they have reserve that can cover site upkeep for decades, and the way Jimbo Wales spends the money. And this is like, more than a decade ago.
It's the same for St Jude. They sit on millions in reserve and ask for donations that end up in the CEOs pocket.
Source?
Which one? There's so many scandals St Jude is involved in. A 5 second search on Google will give you at least 20 different ones just on the first page.
That may be true, but I feel like you're the one propagating the information so you should back it up with one source. But now that you're noting that there are "so many," it seems only right that you now include multiple sources of different scandals.
Lazy ass. These are just the first three examples. Spend more time and even an ounce of effort and maybe you'll fucking learn something.
https://www.fiercehealthcare.com/providers/st-jude-fights-donors-families-court-share
https://hoptownchronicle.org/st-jude-stashed-away-886-million-in-unspent-revenue-last-year/
https://www.propublica.org/article/st-jude-hoards-billions-while-many-of-its-families-drain-their-savings
It only takes an ounce of effort to provide a source from the get go. ❤️
Where they actually fired? From skimming your linked article it was more of a restructuring, moving them to different positions. The restructuring might be ill advised, though I could not find real information about any connection to the union topic, besides someone from the community claming that, without further information on that connection.
Find this reference on Reddit.
Am I too european to understand this? If they "get jobs elsewhere at the WMF" this is not a layoff, is it? I know the US has nearly no worker protections, so maybe that makes it a layoff. Do they need to interview for these positions again?
That paragraph I don't understand. Why is union busting the only explanation?
From one of the comments of that Reddit thread:
I think that is an interesting detail here, though I have not bothered to go through the sources for this.
Ah, ok. That exlains it. It's really a shitty move. I guess no CEO or other high up manager in the US would do this differently. What a shit
My employer does this too. It is a layoff technically but employees are given the opportunity to interview for another position in the company if they want to stay. If it was a "restructuring" the employees would've been moved to another department and possibly a new role without their consent.
*Were
Perfect timing. I just started donating to a new startup (comingle) that seems as promising as Wikipedia once was. Nonprofit whose goal is to start their own universal basic income for users who don't want to wait for the government to start one. Now I can cancel my Wikipedia donations and not feel so bad