UK Wikipedia Workers seek union recognition
84 points by theresnotime
84 points by theresnotime
Good! Generally the more unionized the workforce is, the stronger they are. More resilient against layoffs, more power to demand wage increases to keep up with the rising cost of living, more power to negotiate good benefits.
I don't think that Wikipedia is an organisation where it would be necessary—I imagine a not-for-profit as well-run as Wikipedia would take decent care of its employees—but it doesn't hurt to be part of a large union that can have your back if it becomes necessary.
A lot of not-for-profits have hideous labor practices. People are willing to put stupid amounts of effort into their jobs because of the organizations mission. They do this until they finally burn out. The organization then finds another person who is similarly driven, and then drives them until the burn out. Rinse. Lather. Repeat.
Part of the problem is that the employees themselves aren't willing to stand up against the employer because they're worried about endangering the mission. Unions are probably necessary to save both the employees, and the organizations, from this horrible cycle.
A lot of not-for-profits have hideous labor practices. People are willing to put stupid amounts of effort into their jobs because of the organizations mission. They do this until they finally burn out. The organization then finds another person who is similarly driven, and then drives them until the burn out. Rinse. Lather. Repeat.
Sounds a lot like union organizers and religious groups.
Sadly, WMF seems a little less benevolent than one would imagine. I hope this unionization effort goes well and can help protect the workers.
The WMF is... hardly well run, once you look past the glossy reporting (and the idea that "Wikipedia is a big site and a public good, so the people running it must be good"). It's far closer to Mozilla; there's a consistent, over a decade long problem of the WMF spearheading moonshot projects while deprioritizing long-standing issues with Wikipedia/mediawiki at best.
At worst, the WMF inflicts unfinished projects onto Wikipedia (VisualEditor rollout) and uses the popularity of Wikipedia to do sketchy/borderline unethical fundraising methods (while most people in richer countries will just ignore the scare banners, WMF leadership has bragged in the past about getting a lot of money from poorer countries; subsequent reporting made it clear that a lot of people that don't speak English very well read the fundraiser banners and thought that if they didn't donate, Wikipedia would shut down), and most of that money isn't invested back into Wikipedia, but spend on aforementioned moonshot projects and their ever growing endowment. (Which to be clear, is so massive that the WMF's aggressive fundraising messages, even if they weren't exploitative, are dubious to begin with - they aren't strapped for cash in the slightest and can keep operating for over at least a decade without new donations.)
This particular union seems to have been formed in response to the WMF laying off the team they formed a while back after the community vocally complained that the WMF wasn't helping them the way the not-for-profit is supposed to do.
As to the part where you mention Wikipedia specifically, I think I've read about some problems recently, so they're proabably not just doing it for fun and giggles... after a quick search e.g.: https://www.theregister.com/software/2026/05/30/wikipedia-editors-plot-strike-and-banner-sabotage-after-wikimedia-layoffs/5248491
Very nice to see. I wasn’t familiar with UTAW before but sounds like an interesting group… I’d like to see some of that energy here in the states.
There are plenty of tech unions in the states: CODE-CWA, and OPEIU just to name a few. Join a local Tech Workers Coalition chapter if you want to connect with more unionized tech workers. Or look up something here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unionization_in_the_tech_sector