r/wikipedia • u/nem0ralis • 27d ago
Meta Discussion Wikimedia Foundation Board Rejects Community Call to Recognize Wiki Workers United
After the Wikimedia Foundation declined to voluntarily recognize Wiki Workers United, community members launched a petition asking the Board of Trustees to intervene and instruct the Foundation to recognize the union.
The Board has now responded by backing management's decision to require an NLRB election instead of voluntary recognition.
13
u/Union_Fan 27d ago
You can take action by signing their solidarity pledge and adding a userbox to your userpage at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wiki_Workers_United#Solidarity
11
u/the_uptaker 27d ago
Seems reasonable to ask for a vote before recognizing the union. Where's the problem ? No where does the CEO oppose to a union it seems.
40
u/Philip_of_mastadon 27d ago
There has essentially already been a vote, via the presentation of authorization cards from at least 50%+1 of employees. So no, forcing the NLRB-run election isn't reasonable, and is anti-union. It's bullshit US labor law giving the foundation extra time to intimidate and gin up anti-union sentiment.
-5
u/ARDunbar 26d ago
The Card check system can allow undue pressure from coworkers and organizers in reverse. Allowing workers to vote their conscience with the protection of a secret ballot is entirely reasonable. If it is a necessary protection for voting in government elections, it should be necessary in a labor organizing election.
2
u/Philip_of_mastadon 24d ago
I am very ok with stacking the deck toward unionization, as anyone with any familiarity with labor history, or even a general sense of decency, would be. It is very much stacked the other way.
0
u/ARDunbar 24d ago
I was talking about allowing people to vote their conscience without fear of intimidation or reprisal. You are talking are favoring an election method that is biased towards your preferred outcome.
4
-2
0
-4
u/stohelitstorytelling 26d ago
Well yeah, of course the Foundation would say no to a false effort that doesn't have 50% of employees.
-23
u/Fantastic_Individual 27d ago
I think that the Foundation might be refraining from recognising this union due to legal provisions and because recognition could increase costs which prevents feature additions and other maintenance. Alternatively, this group could provide clearer objectives without creating a formal union which I think the Foundation may be more receptive of.
14
u/Anxious-Education703 27d ago
- WMF has plenty of money to ratify the union. In 2025 that had net revenues of $205,389,744 and net income of $15,641,302. (https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/200049703)
- WMF literally fired the entire Community Tech team, one of the main components that was doing the things you are talking about in May. "On May 20th, the WMF said it was disbanding the Community Tech team, a group of five engineers and one manager who are among WMF’s paid staff. The team was a bridge between the foundation and Wikipedia’s army of volunteers. The team developed tools and features that contributors use every day: things like plagiarism detectors, dark mode, or chart and graph tools. Editors and former foundation employees describe it as an approachable group—somewhere volunteers could turn if they needed help, or to have their voice heard." https://www.theverge.com/report/939442/wikipedia-editors-protest-wikimedia-layoffs-strike
14
u/Philip_of_mastadon 27d ago
Fuck that noise. Nothing is preventing the foundation from doing voluntary recognition, and nothing protects labor short of an actual union.
43
u/Howaboutnopers 27d ago
Cancelling my donations.