I hear the recording very differently than how you are portraying this
here. Listen to what Bernadette says in the recording. There's a process
that needs to happen, and that is exactly what Bernadette was
explaining. "If the decision is to have a union, then there will be a
union."
We're all familiar with going through decision-making processes - they
are often very bureaucratic on the Wikimedia projects, but we respect
the process, and we don't like to see people taking shortcuts while the
discussions are happening. Give the process time here, and let's make
sure that it results in the best outcome for everyone in the long term.
Thanks,
Mike
On 27/07/2026 23:09, Hannah Clover via Wikimedia-l wrote:
Another informative comment from Jbernick98:
"As a U.S. trained labor lawyer and past organizer with WWU, this
statement, alongside the WMF’s public facing community post reek of
union-busting disinformation. What’s critical for the community to know
is that a supermajority of the workers already did vote by signing a
card. This “extra step” is just a delay tactic that employers are
advised to do when they don’t want a union. They are doing the same
thing in the UK as well.
These WMF workers have already been extremely brave by expressly
affirming their commitment to a union. Years of efforts to get this
accomplished. This is not some rash decision by them. Moreover, the
community supports their union too! It literally makes no sense as to
why WMF thought this was the right decision here in this critical moment.
Finally, as a general reminder of the lack of good faith that was
demonstrated by WMF here, there was a legal process for WMF, offered by
the union, that intentionally avoided delay and going through the Trump
administration. It is a very well-trodden path which includes a third-
party arbitration process to verify the integrity of the signed members.
Again, I believe this demonstrates a willful attempt to ignore the
supermajority of their workers’ desires and, worse, causes a further
erosion of trust and goodwill between WMF management and their staff
going forward."
I really am incredibly disappointed that this is the battle the
Wikimedia Foundation has decided to fight. I don't think this decision
follows the ethics behind what makes the movement what it is.
On Mon, Jul 27, 2026, 6:03 p.m. Hannah Clover
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
wrote:
To anyone who wasn't present, I'd also like to point out what was
said at the fireside chat: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/
File:Questions_for_Bernadette_Meehan_regarding_the_WMF%27s_recognition_of_Wiki_Works_United.webm
<https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Questions_for_Bernadette_Meehan_regarding_the_WMF%27s_recognition_of_Wiki_Works_United.webm>
On Mon, Jul 27, 2026, 5:59 p.m. Hannah Clover
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Incredibly sad to see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Wikipedia:Village_pump_(WMF)#h-
Recent_questions_about_the_Foundation_and_US_unionization_request-20260727160700
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(WMF)#h-Recent_questions_about_the_Foundation_and_US_unionization_request-20260727160700>.
Wikimedia Foundation employees deserve better than a statement that attempts to mislead
them. https://wikimediafoundation.org/news/2026/07/27/statement-cwa-recognition-request/
<https://wikimediafoundation.org/news/2026/07/27/statement-cwa-recognition-request/>
is full of unionbusting rhetoric. The WMF should be better than that and not be using the
same tactics as Amazon.
Only recognizing your employee's right to unionize when you are
legally forced to is not being neutral about unions and it
definitely isn't being supportive.
I'd like to quote a statement from Femke in the above discussion:
Today was a day to show trust in staff. Because trust is what we
will need in the years ahead, which are likely going to be as
chaotic as the last couple of years if not more so. The framing
in this letter does not convince me the Foundation leadership is
neutral in this matter. A small example: rather than
acknowledging the WWU effort to build a global union (or network
of bargaining units), the text focuses on the CWA, which cannot
represent global staff, seemingly to diminish international
support: "It is important to note that the CWA is only seeking
to represent a portion of US-based staff, and there is no global
union option due to different labor laws across countries and
jurisdictions." Also note how the text emphasises the 'portion
of', which is technically correct as US labour law exclude
managers, but downplays the role of the union in representing
most workers.
The FAQ emphases what leadership calls 'good working
conditions'. The listing of benefits tries to convince staff
that all is well and that unions might not be necessary. What
the text fails to mention is that these are not contractual and
can be changed unilaterally. In tumultuous times, we need staff
that has the security of actual 'secondary labour conditions' as
we call them in the Netherlands. The 'benefits' are especially
questionable when the "generous" 15-day holiday allowance would
be illegal in every single EU country <https://en.wikipedia.org/
wiki/List_of_minimum_annual_leave_by_country>.
Today was a day to show trust in staff. Instead, we've started a
rough road of persuasion and spin. Fortunately, as a movement,
we are exceptionally well trained to recognise this. I'm
confident staff will prevail.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- [email protected], guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]/message/HZ4DCW4PMPFZAPVCB5FFP4PLU2V3BMNP/
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- [email protected], guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]/message/7BRYNOFCYXWLP4OJOGXJLTCCTYCCNPVC/
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
